Skip to main content

Full text of "Indexing and précis writing"

See other formats





1  IfllW                                                         ^ 











AN  D 











*e  i 

ft  = 


^  ,„„..  _J 

!^^i-t  i 

9        i 



,.,  ,_,,.,„,,.  ;;;   ,..,,  ,  ..,       .  ,,,   3 

1    J 









NKW    YORK    •    BOSTON    •    CHICAGO 







G.  B.  BEAK,  M.A.OxoN.,  F.R.G.S. 











I  AM  not  aware  that  the  present  volume  differs  materially  from 
other  text-books  on  the  same  subject,  although  it  will  possibly 
be  found  to  cover  a  somewhat  wider  field  than  usual,  and  a 
Key  is  available  for  purposes  of  reference.  I  propose  to  make, 
however,  no  apology  for  another  addition  to  precis  literature, 
because  I  believe  that  the  study  of  precis  writing  deserves  more 
attention  than  it  now  gets. 

I  desire  to  express  niy  deep  sense  of  obligation  to  the 
Controller  of  His  Majesty's  Stationery  Office  for  permission 
to  reproduce  official  documents,  to  the  Editor  of  the  Times 
for  the  Police  Court  Keports  and  other  material  taken  from 
its  columns,  and  to  those  authors  or  their  representatives 
who  have  very  kindly  consented  to  the  quotation  of  passages 
from  their  works. 

G.  B.  BEAK. 

OXFORD,  1908. 






A.  INDEX  DEFINED    .......  5 










D.  FORM    .                 . 15 


F.  STYLE 17 



2.  LAW  EVIDENCE     .......  27 


4.  GENERAL  LITERATURE  .                          ...  47 

viii  CONTENTS. 




2.  SUEZ  CANAL  DUES        ......  54 

3.  TENURE  OF  LAND  IN  FIJI    .         .        .        .        .  61 

4.  LABOUR  IN  THE  TRANSVAAL  MINES     ...  67 


6.  FLOGGING  OF  NATIVES  AT  NAIROBI      ...  97 



9.  THE  Loss  OF  THE  DUBLIN  CROWN  JEWELS         .  180 


1.  THE  CONCLUSION  OF  THE  DRUCE  CASE        .        .  194 

2.  THE  CASE  OF  VON  VELTHEIM      ....  204 


4.  A  CHARGE  OF  FALSE  PRETENCES          .        .        .  228 


1.  LORD  CURZON  ON  THE  TRUE  IMPERIALISM  .         .  233 

2.  LORD  CROMER  ON  FREE  TRADE  .         .         .         .  243 

3.  MR.  CHURCHILL  ON  AFRICAN  AFFAIRS        .         .  252 

4.  THE  OPENING  OF  PARLIAMENT,  1908  .         .        .  260 



1.  A.  C.  BENSON— 'THE  UPTON  LETTERS'       .         ..288 

2.  OSCAR  WILDE — '  INTENTIONS  '  290 

3.  HERBERT  SPENCER—  *  EDUCATION  '        .        .         .  291 

4.  HILAIRE  BELLOC — '  ESTO  PERPETUA  '  .         .         .  293 


6.  JOHN  BUCHAN— 'THE  AFRICAN  COLONY'     .        .  296 


8.  WALTER  PATER—'  MARIUS  THE  EPICUREAN  '       .  299 




THE  history  of  Precis  Writing  is  practically  impossible 
to  trace  with  any  exactitude,  for  no  records,  apparently, 
of  its  original  adoption  and  gradual  growth  exist.  The 
art  is  clearly  one  of  comparatively  recent  origin  and  the 
outcome,  presumably,  of  strictly  modern  conditions.  Not 
to  go  further  afield  than  the  United  Kingdom,  the  Foreign 
Office,  both  on  account  of  its  wealth  of  correspondence 
and  its  particular  method  of  conducting  that  correspon- 
dence, was  undoubtedly  the  first  Government  Department 
to  adopt  precis  writing,  and  still  remains  the  office  in 
which  it  is  most  practised. 

The  appointment  of  Precis  Writer,  which  to-day  is 
virtually  equivalent  to  that  of  Private  Secretary,  was 
first  officially  recognised  during  the  reign  of  Queen  Anne, 
by  which  time  it  was  probably  realised  that  the  Secretary 
of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs  could  not  possibly  himself 
wade  through  all  the  original  documents  with  which  he 
was  called  upon  to  deal.  But  for  at  least  a  century  and 
a  half  subsequent  to  the  Hanoverian  Succession  the  Chief 
Foreign  Secretary  and  even  the  Monarch  were  in  the 
habit  of  perusing  in  full 'the  more  important  despatches. 
Although  memoranda  were  invariably  drawn  up  for  her 
information,  the  Letters  of  Queen  Victoria  go  far  to  show 
that  Her  late  Majesty  was  not  always  content  with  a 
summary  or  resume  of  official  documents,  but  preferred  in 
many  cases  to  consult  the  documents  themselves. 

Lord  Palmerston  again  usually  struggled  with  original 
reports,  unless  their  illegibility  was  extreme,  when  he 
P.w.  A  <g 


called  for  either  a  'readable  copy'  or  a  precis  of  them. 
In  his  minutes,  which  were  written  in  a  bold,  clear  hand, 
with  a  capital  letter  for  every  noun,  he  frequently  criticised 
both  the  style  and  the  handwriting  of  his  subordinates : 

"  Mr.  B W seems  to  think  that  Secretaries  of  State 

have  nothing  else  to  do  but  to  read  his  despatches,  admire  his 
long  sentences,  his  multitude  of  words,  and  his  never-ending 
remarks.  It  is  highly  desirable  that  he  should  be  more  pithy 
and  concise." 

"These  Consuls  are  too  bad;  there  is  hardly  one  of  them  that 
writes  a  decent  hand  and  with  readable  ink.  P.  29/1/51." 

"  Reading  Mr.  R 's  handwriting  is  like  running  penknives 

into  one's  eyes.  P.  21/4/64. '51 

But  precis  writing  was  always  practised  and  its  value 
clearly  recognised.  Lord  Clarendon,  for  instance,  on 
quitting  office  in  1866,  addressed  a  letter  of  thanks  to 
the  Clerks  of  the  Foreign  Office,  in  which  he  expressed 
his  regret  that  he  had  not  become  "  personally  acquainted 
with  those  gentlemen  who  had  from  time  to  time  furnished 
such  valuable  memoranda  for  his  information  and  guidance." 

Presumably,  Secretaries  of  State  to-day  have  not  to  cope 
with  some  of  the  difficulties  of  which  Lord  Palmerston 
complained.  Good  ink  is  plentiful  and  inexpensive.  Hand- 
writing, both  good  and  bad,  has  been  largely  superseded 
by  the  introduction  of  the  typewriter.  Nowadays  type- 
written reports  have  become  the  rule  not  only  at  the 
centre,  but  also  on  the  outskirts  of  the  British  Empire. 
Reports,  even  from  lower  grade  officials  and  whether 
clearly  written  or  the  reverse,  are  seldom  read  before 
being  typed  or  printed.  In  the  colonies  the  native  clerks 
have  learned  to  use  the  type  machine ;  in  the  equatorial 
forest  and  in  the  Central  African  bush  the  click  of  the 
typewriter  is  as  familiar  to  the  native  ear  as  the  click 
of  the  rifle ;  carriers  have  come  to  realise  that  the  white 
man's  'book  juju'  (typewriter)  must  be  borne  with  as 
much  care  as  his  '  beef  juju '  (firearms). 

The  rapid  advance,  however,  of  mechanical  invention, 
which  has  rendered  the  task  of  Secretaries  of  State  lighter 

1  The  Minutes  quoted  and  many  others,  and  also  Lord  Clarendon's 
letter  of  thanks  which  follows,  will  be  found  in  Recollections  of  the 
Old  Foreign  Office,  by  Sir  Edward  Hertslet,  K.C.B. 


in  one  way,  has  been  accompanied  with  a  still  more  rapid 
advance  in  the  mass  of  documents  with  which  they  have 
to  contend.  With  this  result,  that  the  art  of  precis  writing 
has  become,  and  is  still  becoming,  one  of  ever-increasing 

Upon  this  importance  it  is  unnecessary  to  dilate  at 
length.  Confined  in  the  first  instance  to  Government 
Offices,  the  application  of  precis  writing  has  been  extended 
notably  to  commerce,  law  and  journalism ;  in  fact  there 
are  few  departments  of  life  in  which  a  knowledge  of  this 
subject  will  not  prove  of  service.  In  business  as  in 
Government  Departments  precis  writing  has  been  adopted 
as  a  time-saving  device,  and  its  importance  in  this  con- 
nection was  recently  emphasised  on  the  London  stage. 
In  Simple  Simon,  at  a  critical  moment  in  the  play,  the 
1  Juggernauth,'  rushing  into  his  city  office  and  hurling  on 
to  the  table  a  bundle  of  documents,  tells  his  chief  clerk 
to  'epitomise'  them.  When  we  read  that  Sir  Ignorant 
Fees,  K.C.,  has  been  'instructed'  by  Messrs.  Rookem  and 
Stowit,  we  may  conclude  that  Counsel  has  been  furnished 
with  a  precis  of  his  case  which  he  may  or  may  not  have 
read  before  going  into  Court.  Precis  writing  enters 
largely  into  literary,  historical  and  secretarial  work,  and 
a  knowledge  of  it  may  be  regarded  as  indispensable  for 
the  journalistic  profession.  A  large  portion  of  modern 
so-called  literary  and  dramatic  criticism  is  really  precis 
of  a  most  slipshod  character,  for  the  majority  of  the  critics 
of  to-day,  having  no  canons  to  go  by,  confine  themselves 
to  giving  the  contents  of  a  book  or  the  plot  of  a  play. 
The  popular  conception  of  journalism  as  the  art  of  making 
bricks  without  straw,  of  scribbling  to  fill  space,  is  only 
partly  true.  While  sometimes  the  language  of  the 
journalist  is  profuse,  involved  and  ornamental ;  at  others 
it  must  be  concise,  lucid  and  simple.  More  especially 
is  this  the  case  when  summaries  of  news,  parliamentary 
debates,  public  speeches  and  law  evidence  are  in  question. 
Examples  of  all  of  these  are  included  in  the  present 
volume,  and  further  models  may  be  found  daily  in  the 
columns  of  the  Times.  It  is  by  means  of  these  summaries 
that  the  general  reader,  who  has  not  time  to  go  through 


his  paper  from  beginning  to  end,  is  enabled  at  a  glance 
to  glean  the  gist  of  what  is  happening  in  the  world. 

Adopted  originally  as  a  time-saving  device,  it  is  only 
quite  recently  that  the  value  of  precis  writing  as  a  means 
of  mental  training  has  come  to  be  recognised.  The  art 
was  long  practised  in  different  professions  before  being 
given  a  place  in  our  educational  system.  Yet,  ignoring 
the  question  of  practical  utility,  its  value  is  unquestionable, 
for  it  involves  not  only  the  exercise  of  sound  judgment 
and  true  discrimination,  but  also  the  study  of  language 
and  the  cultivation  of  style.  While  perhaps  there  is  no 
language  which  is  more  expressive  and  more  beautiful 
than  this  English  tongue  of  ours,  there  is  assuredly  no 
other  language  which  is  so  barbarously  and  callously 
abused  by  those  who  write  and  speak  it.  We  have  too 
long  been  accustomed  in  the  study  of  other  languages 
to  neglect  our  own  or  to  adopt  the  roundabout  method 
of  translation  instead  of  the  direct  means  which  precis 
writing  will  be  found  to  afford.  The  careful  study  and 
practice  of  precis  will  serve  to  reveal  not  only  the  wealth 
and  beauty  of  our  language,  but  also  its  marvellous 
adaptability.  It  is  with  the  object  of  directing  attention 
to  this  latter  point  that  examples  of  general  literature 
have  been  included  in  this  volume,  and  it  will  be  observed 
that,  although  they  all  write  equally  pure  English,  each 
author  quoted  possesses  a  style  which  is  peculiarly  his 

Many  people  read  a  great  deal;  few  ever  endeavour 
to  sum  up  mentally  what  they  have  read.  With  his 
characteristic  insight,  Lord  Rosebery  in  a  speech  on  some 
occasion  somewhere  warned  his  hearers  against  desultory 
reading,  against  reading  without  method  and  without  a 
definite  object.  Casual  and  indiscriminate  reading  is  a 
most  alluring  and  frequently  a  most  pernicious  pastime, 
unless  the  reader  makes  a  point  of  summing  up  mentally 
what  he  has  added  to  his  store  of  knowledge.  Perhaps 
there  is  no  better  safeguard  against  the  danger  indicated 
by  Lord  Rosebery  than  the  cultivation  of  what,  for  the 
want  of  a  better  term,  may  be  called  the  '  precis '  habit 
of  mind.  The  man  who  has  acquired  this  habit  by 


practising  precis  writing  in  his  youth  is  unlikely  to  drop 
it  in  later  life. 

But,  putting  aside  its  intrinsic  value,  the  examinations 
for  which  a  knowledge  of  precis  writing,  with  or  without 
indexing,  is  now  required,  are  sufficiently  numerous  to 
command  the  careful  attention  of  both  instructors  and 
students.  The  examinations  in  question  include  the 
following :  Diplomatic  and  Consular  Services ;  the  Indian 
and  Home  Civil  Services  (Post  Office  Supplementary 
Clerks,  Assistants  of  Customs  and  Excise,  Assistant 
Surveyors  of  Taxes,  etc.) ;  the  London  University  Matri- 
culation, the  Central  Welsh  Board,  the  Society  of  Arts, 
the  Chartered  Institute  of  Secretaries. 

2.    INDEXING. 

Many  of  the  hints  to  be  given  will  be  found  to  be 
equally  applicable  to  both  indexing  and  precis  writing,  but, 
even  at  the  risk  of  repetition,  for  the  sake  of  convenience 
and  in  order  to  avoid  confusion,  the  two  subjects  will  be 
taken  separately. 

A.  Index  defined.     An  index,  which  is  also  known  as  a 
docket,  schedule,  or  abstract,  is  the  arrangement  of  des- 
patches, letters,  or  other  documents,  forming  a  connected 
correspondence    on    some    particular   subject,    in    tabular 
form  and  chronological  order,  giving  briefly  and  distinctly 
the  essence  or  substance  of  each  of  the  documents  dealt  with. 

The  point  to  be  borne  in  mind  is  that  each  document 
must  be  treated  separately. 

B.  Official  Instructions.    The  following  official  instructions 
to  candidates  are  generally  prefixed    to   the  majority  of 
public  examination  papers : 

"Having  read  the  accompanying  correspondence — (1)  Make 
an  index  of  the  several  letters  and  other  papers.  The  index 
should  deal  separately  with  every  letter  or  document  whether 
covering  or  enclosed.  It  should  contain  the  date  of  each  letter 
or  document ;  the  names  of  the  persons  by  whom  and  to  whom 
it  is  written ;  and  in  as  few  words  as  possible  the  subject  of  it. 
The  merits  of  such  an  index  are  :  (a)  to  give  the  main  subject 
of  each  letter  or  document,  omitting  everything  else  ;  (6)  to  do 
this  briefly,  distinctly,  and  in  such  a  form  as  readily  to  catch 
the  eye." 


These  instructions  are  sufficiently  clear,  and  they  are 
usually  accompanied  by  a  specimen  index  and  ruled  form. 
Experience  has  repeatedly  shown,  however,  that  the 
majority  of  candidates  for  examination  either  fail  to  grasp 
fully  their  meaning  or  else  place  a  wrong  interpretation 
upon  them.  It  has,  therefore,  been  found  necessary  to 
treat  the  subject  of  indexing  in  greater  detail,  and  to 
indicate  more  fully  what  is  essential  and  what  is  not 
essential  to  the  compilation  of  a  satisfactory  index. 

C.  Rules  for  Indexing.  The  following  rules,  or  rather 
hints,  have  been  drawn  up  with  the  view  of  enabling  the 
student  to  avoid  the  more  common  mistakes  which  the 
unpractised  index  writer  is  liable  to  make,  and  their  careful 
study  at  the  commencement  is  calculated  to  save  time  in 
the  long  run. 

Subject-matter  and  MetJiod.  The  first  and  golden  rule  for 
both  Indexing  and  Precis  Writing  is  to  grasp  thoroughly 
the  subject-matter  of  the  correspondence  in  question. 
Select  carefully  what  is  essential,  and  be  equally  rigid  in 
rejecting  what  is  unimportant.  This  may  appear  at  first 
sight  somewhat  difficult  when,  as  is  frequently  the  case, 
the  mass  of  documents  to  be  indexed  is  considerable  and 
runs  to  great  length.  On  examination,  however,  official 
correspondence  will  prove  easy,  simple  and  brief. 

All  official  letters,  and  nearly  all  business  letters,  are 
characterised  by  a  uniformity  which  soon  becomes  familiar; 
they  are  similar  in  style  and  in  logical  arrangement.  It  is 
customary  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  a  letter  in  the 
first  sentence  of  the  reply  to  it,  to  state  the  gist  of  its 
contents,  then  to  give  a  summary  of  the  point  at  issue, 
while  the  closing  paragraphs  will  sum  up,  in  brief  and 
sometimes  forcible  but  always  polite  language,  the  question 
under  consideration,  or  convey  instructions  and  the 
decision  of  the  Department  concerned  in  connection  with  it. 

Short  cuts  are  not  to  be  recommended,  and  the  student 
should  make  a  point  of  assimilating  the  whole  corre- 
spondence before  commencing  to  compile  his  index.  In 
ordinary  examinations,  however,  the  time  allowed,  although 
ample  for  the  practised  hand,  is  not  more  than  sufficient 
for  the  beginner;  the  candidate  should  keep  an  eye  on  the 


clock ;  should  he  find  himself  getting  behindhand,  he  may 
be  reminded  that,  as  a  rule  but  not  invariably,  a  satisfac- 
tory index  of  a  letter  may  be  gathered  from  the  first 
paragraph  of  the  reply  to  it. 

Generally  speaking,  the  convention  of  one  letter,  one 
subject — and  that,  consequently,  no  letter  should  deal  with 
more  than  one  subject — is  strictly  adhered  to  in  official 
and  business  correspondence.  But  the  convention  may  be 
broken,  and  in  this  event  the  student  will  have  to  decide 
which  is  the  predominating  subject  and  introduce  the  less 
important  by  participial  or  subordinate  clauses  Much  has 
been  written  about  the  difficulties  of  indexing  and  precis 
writing,  but  for  examination  purposes  the  exercise  of  a 
certain  amount  of  common-sense  is  the  chief  essential.  In 
actual  practice,  however,  it  frequently  happens  that  the 
point  which  to  all  intents  and  purposes  is  the  most  essential 
to-day  may  be  the  least  essential  to-morrow,  and  vice  versa. 
Unless  the  writers  of  the  original  letters  express  clearly 
what  they  intend  to  say,  they  may  mislead  the  index  or 
precis  writer,  on  whose  wording  possibly  a  policy  may  be 
based  or  an  important  decision  arrived  at. 

To  select  the  salient  points  of  a  correspondence  is,  it 
must  be  repeated,  the  main  essential.  Without  this 
selection  everything  else  is  useless.  Before  beginning  to 
write,  therefore,  the  student  should  go  through,  either 
rapidly  or  carefully  as  the  time  given  may  permit,  the 
whole  of  the  correspondence  in  order  to  get  a  clear  idea  of 
its  general  purport  and  the  relative  importance  of  its 
various  parts.  If  he  fails  to  do  this  at  the  commencement, 
he  will  probably  discover  later  that  he  has  given  undue 
prominence  to  some  unimportant  detail,  while  omitting 
some  essential  point.  He  must  first  obtain  a  true  per- 
spective, and,  having  done  this,  he  will  then  proceed  to 
take  the  letters  separately  in  their  order,  allotting  to  each 
its  true  significance,  and  thus  compile  his  index. 

D.  Farm  and  Uniformity.  The  actual  form  which  the 
index  to  a  correspondence  will  assume  is  clearly  indicated 
in  the  official  instructions  which  have  already  been  quoted. 
A  specimen  index  and  ruled  form  are  usually  provided  at 
most  examinations;  but  the  student  may  prefer,  for  the 


sake  of  convenience  and  neatness,  to  draw  up  his  own 
form.  In  the  latter  event  he  may  observe  that  an  ordinary 
sheet  of  foolscap  is  eight  inches  in  width,  and  that  it 
should  be  divided  into  four  columns  as  follows : 

a.  Column  1  is  half  an  inch  wide  for  the  serial  number 
of  the  despatch  or  enclosure. 

/3.  One  and  a  half  inches  are  allowed  for  the  date  of  the 
letter,  i.e.  the  date  of  sending  it.  If  it  is  necessary 
to  quote  the  date  of  receipt,  this  can  be  noted  in 
brackets  underneath  the  preceding  date. 

y.  The  third  column  is  two  inches  wide  for  the  names  or 
designations  of  the  correspondents.  In  this  column 
should  be  copied,  below  the  name  of  the  addressee, 
any  special  note  on  the  nature  of  the  document, 
such  as  (telegram),  (translation),  (confidential), 

8.  Four  inches  will  then  remain  for  the  fourth  column, 
in  which  will  be  inserted  the  subject-matter  of  the 

It  is  thus  that  we  arrive  at  the  form  on  page  9. 

The  specimen  index  given  is  typical  of  ordinary  official 
correspondence,  and  it  will  serve  to  illustrate  the  follow- 
ing remarks. 

In  the  first  place,  every  index  must  have  a  title,  of  which 
the  usual  form  is :  '  Index  of  correspondence  relating  to ' 
(here  insert  subject  of  correspondence  in  question). 

With  regard  to  the  first  column,  the  letters  arranged 
chronologically  according  to  date  of  receipt  will  be  numbered 
accordingly.  If  further  reference  to  any  letter  is  subse- 
quently made  this  will  be  done  by  quoting  its  number 
only,  e.g.  'Enclosure  in  No.  1,'  NOT  'Enclosure  in  letter 
of  llth  October,  1906.' 

In  the  second  column  the  day  of  the  month  should  pre- 
cede the  name  of  the  month,  thus,  llth  October,  1906,  is 
better  than  October  llth,  1906.  The  insertion  in  this 
column  of  the  name  of  the  place  whence  a  letter  is  written 
is  optional,  but  is  usually  omitted.  If  a  document  be 
undated,  the  word  'undated'  or  the  letters  'N,D/  (no 
date)  should  be  inserted. 





Serial  No. 






The  Governor  of 

Transmitting   a    memorial 

Oct.  16.) 

Malta  to 
The  Secretary  of 
State  for  the 

from  the  Archbishop  of  Malta 
to  the  King,  praying  that  His 
Majesty    will    withhold    his 


approval  to  the  proposed  in- 

sertion in  the  Royal  Instruc- 

tions of  a  clause  relating  to 

liberty  of  conscience  and  re- 

ligious worship. 

Enclosure  1 

9th  October, 

The  Archbishop 

Memorial    referred    to    in 

in  No.  1. 


of  Malta  to 

No.  1. 

The  King 




The  Governor  of 

Forwarding  copy  of  a  reso- 


Malta  to 

lution    passed    at    a    public 

Nov.  1.) 

The  Secretary  of 

meeting,    protesting    against 
the  imposition  of  a  lawplacing 
the  Roman  Catholic  religion 

in    Malta    on    a    footing    of 

equality  with    those    of    all 

other  creeds. 

Enclosure  2 


The  Secretary  of 

Resolution  referred  to  in 

in  No.  2. 

the  Meeting  to 

No.  2. 

The  Governor  of 





The  Secretary  of 
State  to 

Directing    that  the  Arch- 
bishop be  informed  that  His 


The  Governor  of 

Majesty  has  given  no  direc- 


tions   on   the   memorial  and 

resolution  enclosed  in  No.  1 

and  No.  2  respectively,  inas- 

much as  there  is  nothing  in 

the  new  Royal   Instructions 

in  any  way  inconsistent  with 

the    full    protection    of    the 

Roman   Catholic  religion  in 



The  designations  or  offices  of  the  correspondents  in 
column  3  are  more  important  than  their  names.  Strictly 
speaking,  no  surnames  should  appear,  but  it  is  very  usual 
to  find  them  in  an  index  of  Consular  correspondence,  and 
again  where  the  writer  is  a  well-known  man,  e.g.  Mr. 
Balfour,  Sir  Edward  Grey.  But  even  in  this  case  confu- 
sion may  occur,  because  the  same  individual  may  hold 
different  portfolios  in  different  administrations.  In  con- 
sular correspondence,  certainly,  it  is  of  more  importance  to 
know  the  locality  of  a  consulate  than  the  name  of  the 
consul.  Custom,  however,  counts  for  a  great  deal ;  most 
official  documents  are  published  primarily  for  the  informa- 
tion of  Parliament,  and  only  indirectly  for  that  of  the 
general  public.  Consequently,  it  is  futile  to  lay  down  a 
hard  and  fast  rule,  and  the  student  must  use  his  own 
judgment  as  to  whether  he  employs  names  or  titles, 
remembering  always  that  clearness  is  essential,  and  that 
he  should  adhere  to  the  same  designation  throughout. 

It  need  hardly  be  remarked,  perhaps,  that  the  fourth 
column  will  generally  prove  to  be  the  most  important  of 
the  group,  for  it  should  contain  the  gist  of  each  letter. 
It  is  probably  the  only  column  which  will  present  any 
difficulty.  The  initial  words  of  the  fourth  column  will  be 
either  a  Present  Participle  or  the  third  person  singular  of 
the  Present  Indicative.  Either  of  these  forms  is  equally 
admissible,  although  the  former  is  to  be  preferred.  Which- 
ever form  the  student  may  elect  to  adopt,  however,  he 
must  be  careful  to  retain  throughout.  In  this,  as  in  other 
respects,  an  index  should  be  characterised  by  uniformity. 

Moreover  the  initial  words  should  be  appropriate  to  the 
subject-matter  and  to  the  relative  position  of  the  writer 
and  the  recipient.  The  Head  of  a  Department,  for  instance, 
commands,  directs,  approves,  sanctions;  a  subordinate  re- 
ports, submits,  informs,  replies  and  so  on.  The  Secretary 
of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs  does  not  submit  a  proposition 
for  the  approval  of  a  Consul,  nor  does  an  Ambassador 
*  dissent  from '  a  policy  laid  down  by  the  Secretary  of 
State.  The  list  of  words  given  below,  although  by  no 
means  an  exhaustive  one,  will  probably  be  found  sufficient 
for  ordinary  cases. 



A  document  should  be  cited  or  referred  to  by  its  index 
number  alone  and  not  by  its  date,  writer  or  contents. 
For  instance,  the  index  to  a  later  document  may  consist 
simply  of  a  reference  to  an  earlier  one  in  the  same  corre- 
spondence, and  may  run  somewhat  thus :  *  Furnishing 
information  asked  for  in  No.  .  .  .'  *  Eeplying  to  queries 
raised  in  No.  .  .  .'  'Repeating  substance  of  No.  .  .  .' 
and  so  on. 


Acceding  to. 

Acknowledging  receipt  of. 





Agreeing  to. 






Calling  for. 

Calling  on. 



Complaining  of. 

Concurring  in. 




Demurring  to. 




Dissenting  from. 

Drawing  attention  to. 

















Pressing  for. 


Protesting  against. 





Referring  to. 

















E.  Enclosures.     In  official  correspondence  it   frequently 
happens  that  an  enclosure  is  of  greater  importance  than  the 
letter  in  which  it  is  transmitted.     For  instance,  a  Consul 
will  sometimes  forward  the  report  of  a  Vice-Consul,  merely 
stating  very  generally  the  subject,  of  such  report,  but  with- 
out giving  the  gist  of  it  or  criticising  its  contents.     Each 
of   the   large  Government   offices  is  divided  into    several 
departments,  and  the  correspondence  between  these  various 
departments  is  conducted  in  the  form  not  of  letters  but  of 
minutes.     These  minutes  are  usually  extremely  brief  and 
to  the  point,  couched  in  the  simplest  language  and  shorn  of 
that  formal  phraseology  which  is  frequently  regarded  as 
the  main  characteristic  of  official  letters.     Huge  batches  of 
correspondence,  enveloped  in  what  are  commonly  known  as 
'jackets/  are  circulated  and  initialled  with  such  remarks 
as   'passed   for  information,'    'forwarded    for   information 
and  favour  of  return,' etc.,  etc.,  arid  sent  back  with  'seen/ 
'read,'   'sanctioned,'  etc.,    etc.,    as    the    case    may  be.     A 
minute  is  seldom  lengthy  and  its  phraseology  is  usually 
hackneyed,  but  to  an  officer  a  terse  official  phrase  is  as  full 
of  meaning  as  a  formula  to  a  mathematician. 

The  importance  of  enclosures,  then,  is  such  that  they  are 
given  in  an  index  the  same  prominence  as  ordinary  letters, 
although,  naturally,  they  will  be  numbered  differently. 
Enclosures  must  therefore  be  indexed  separately  as  such 
and  not  as  necessarily  forming  part  of  the  letter  in  which 
they  are  transmitted.  In  the  first  three  columns  they  will 
be  kept  absolutely  distinct.  In  the  fourth  column  care 
must  be  taken  to  avoid  indexing  enclosures  twice,  first  as 
a  portion  of  the  letter  in  which  they  are  contained  and 
secondly  by  themselves. 

F.  Brevity.     The  space  used  for  the  index  of  a  letter 
must  necessarily  depend  largely  upon   its  greater  or  less 
prolixity.     In  this  connection  much  stress  has  frequently 
been  laid  upon  the  importance  of  adhering  strictly  to  what 
is  commonly  known  as  the  Five  Line  Rule,  which  requires 
index-writers  not  to  use  more  than  five  lines  in  column  iv. 
for  the  index  of  any  one  document.     A  more  nonsensical 
rule  was  never  discussed,  and  my  only  purpose  in  referring 
to  it  is  to  condemn  it.     Its  unsoundness  consists  in  this, 


that,  while  it  handicaps  large  writing,  it  can  easily  be 
defeated  by  writing  small.  It  would  be  safer  to  lay  down 
a  rule  that  the  index  of  no  one  letter  should  exceed  a 
certain  number  of  words. 

Again,  too  great  an  insistence  on  brevity  may  be  attended 
with  disastrous  results.  As  a  recent  writer  on  the  subject 
has  pointed  out :  "  Brevity  is  useless  when  to  be  brief  is  to 
be  superfluous ;  lucidity  is  of  no  avail  when  it  is  tanta- 
mount to  obscurity  regarding  the  essential  points  of  the 
correspondence ;  while  proficiency  in  the  art  of  putting  the 
matter  in  such  a  form  as  readily  to  catch  the  eye  is 
positively  worse  than  the  want  of  it  when  the  matter  so 
put  is  irrelevant."  In  indexing  there  is  a  false  brevity  and 
a  true  one,  and  whether  the  student  arrives  at  the  one  or 
the  other  will  depend  largely  upon  his  ability  to  select  the 
salient  point  of  each  document.  Brevity  is  essential,  but  it 
is  useless  without  completeness  and  lucidity,  and  it  must 
not  be  ungrammatical.  A  single  sentence,  either  simple  or 
complex,  should  as  a  rule  suffice  for  the  index  of  any  one 
document.  "Brevity  is  to  be  obtained,  firstly,  by  the 
careful  selection  of  the  true  point  of  the  letters  and  the 
rejection  of  non-essentials,  and.  secondly,  by  the  expression 
of  the  true  point  in  a  condensed  manner."  Ambiguity  must 
be  avoided,  and  the  wording  should  be  such  as  to  render 
misapprehension  impossible. 

The  necessity  of  brevity  in  indexing  is  obvious,  from  the 
very  form  of  the  index  itself ;  but  it  may  be  observed  that, 
when  an  index  only  is  required,  it  is  nearly  twice  as  full  as 
when  a  precis  is  to  be  added. 


A.  A  precis — which  is  derived  from  the  Latin  praecidere, 
to  cut  short,  and  from  the  French  precis,  precise,  and  which 
is  sometimes  termed  a  memorandum,  narrative,  or  summary 
— is  usually  defined  as  the  generalisation  in  narrative  form, 
giving  with  great  conciseness  the  salient  features  only,  of  a 
series  of  events  which  have  already  taken  place. 

Outside  the  exact  sciences,  definitions,  so  far  from  being 
helpful,  frequently  tend  to  obscure,  expand  or  distort  the 


thing  which  it  is  sought  to  define.  With  regard  to  the 
definition  given  above,  it  is  obviously  incomplete,  for  a 
precis  may  be  applied  to  future  and  fictitious  circumstances 
as  well  as  to  events  which  have  already  occurred.  Again, 
although  it  will  be  written  in  the  past  tense  when  ordinary 
documents,  law  evidence  and  general  literature  are  in 
question,  the  present  or  future  tense  should  be  used  in 
epitomising  estimates  and  future  events,  such,  for  instance, 
as  a  projected  campaign  or  the  contemplated  promotion  of 

ItNs.  probably  useless  to  insist  on  an  exact  definition  of 
the  term  precis.  Its  fundamental  characteristic  is  its  nar- 
rative form,  and  it  is  important  to  observe  that  this 
narrative  must  be  consecutive,  distinct,  readable  and 
strictly  to  the  point. 

B.  Official  Instructions.     The  following  remarks,  which  are 
usually  prefixed  to  Civil  Service  examination  papers,  should 
be  carefully  noted : 

"  You  are  desired  to  write  out  in  your  own  words  a  Memo- 
randum or  Precis  of  the  proceedings  described  in  the  following 
letters  or  telegrams. 

"The  object  of  the  precis  (which  should  be  drawn  up  not 
letter  by  letter,  but  in  the  form  of  a  narrative  without  marginal 
references)  is  to  enable  anyone  who  maj'  not  have  time  to  read 
the  original  letters  to  grasp  with  ease  all  the  leading  features  of 
what  passed. 

"The  merits  of  such  a  precis  are — (a)  to  contain  all  that  is 
important  in  the  correspondence,  and  nothing  that  is  unim- 
portant ;  (b)  to  present  this  in  a  readable  and  consecutive  shape, 
expressed  as  distinctly  as  possible,  and  as  briefly  as  is  compatible 
with  completeness  and  distinctness. 

"  Attention  should  be  paid  to  spelling,  handwriting,  grammar 
and  style." 

C.  Subject-matte)'  and  Method.     The  student's  attention  is 
again  directed  to  a  rule  already  given  in  connection  with 
indexing.     He  is  again  reminded  that  he  must  grasp  fully 
the  contents  of  the  correspondence  with  which  he  has  to 
deal,  that  he  must  master  thoroughly  the  subject-matter. 
A  recent  writer1  on  the  subject  has  given  so  excellent  a 
summary  of  the  mental  processes  involved  in  the  writing  of 

1  Precis  and  Precis  Writing,  by  A.  W.  Ready,  B.A. 


a  precis  that  I  shall  make  no  apology  for  quoting  him : 
"  You  have  to  master  a  quantity  of  information  ;  you  have 
to  master  it  in  a  very  \short  space  of  time ;  you  have  to  sift 
and  examine,  to  admit  and  reject ;  you  have  to  be  alert  in 
judgment  and  prompt  in  decision.  When  the  subject- 
matter  has  been  assimilated,  rectified  and  put  into  form, 
you  have  to  express  the  result  in  a  narrative  of  a  peculiar 
character  strictly  circumscribed  and  limited,  and  denuded 
of  the  exuberance  of  an  original  composition." 

Before  putting  his  pen  to  paper  the  student  must  read, 
mark,  learn  and  inwardly  digest,  the  whole  of  the  corre- 
spondence. Having  acquired  a  general  idea  of  its  subject, 
he  will  then  proceed  either  to  mark  carefully  the  important 
points  or  to  strike  out  the  non-essentials.  By  a  gradual 
process  of  selection  and  weeding  out,  he  should  eventually 
arrive  at  the  quintessence  of  the  documents,  and  he  will 
then  proceed  to  write  his  precis.  In  the  first  instance  he 
should  compile  a  rough  copy  or  preliminary  precis,  and  in 
this  he  need  not  be  too  careful  of  brevity.  The  final  copy 
or  final  precis,  however,  will  contain  the  pith,  and  only  the 
pith,  of  the  whole  correspondence.  There  are  few  writers 
who  can  compile  a  precis  at  sight  without  omitting  some 
essential,  and  the  beginner  is  advised  to  adopt  the  following 
method :  a.  Glance  rapidly  through  the  whole  correspond- 
ence to  get  a  general  idea  of  its  subject  and  contents ;  p. 
Eead  the  correspondence  carefully,  and  jot  down  notes  or 
mark  important  passages,  y.  From  these  notes  or  marked 
paragraphs  write  a  rough  precis.  8.  Verify  the  rough  copy, 
and  from  it  compile  the  final  precis. 

D.  Form.  Every  precis  should  commence  with  a  title 
similar  in  form  to  that  employed  in  indexing,  thus  :  '  Precis 
of  correspondence  relating  to,  etc.' 

A  precis  is  not  a  syllabus  or  a  programme,  but  a  con- 
tinuous, consecutive,  readable  narrative.  Its  order  will  be 
chronological ;  the  events  which  come  first  in  point  of  time 
will  be  given  first.  The  writers  of  the  correspondence  are 
unimportant,  as  also  the  method  of  correspondence,  whether 
by  telegram,  interview  or  letter.  The  precis  should  begin 
with  the  date  of  the  year  in  which  the  events  to  be  recorded 
took  place  and  with  a  brief  statement  of  the  subject-matter. 


The  main  theme  should  then  be  developed  gradually  and 
naturally,  subsidiary  facts  being  worked  in  in  their  relative 

The  paragraphing  of  a  precis  will  depend  upon  the 
number  of  subjects  dealt  with  or  the  breaks  in  the  narra- 
tion of  the  main  theme.  When  the  exercise  consists  of  a 
report  or  minutes  of  evidence,  the  facts  and  information 
relating  to  each  subject  must  be  arranged  in  paragraphs 
chronologically,  and  not  necessarily  in  the  order  in  which 
they  appear  in  the  documents  under  consideration. 

The  student  need  hardly  be  cautioned,  perhaps,  that  in 
the  compilation  of  a  precis  no  alteration  of  fact  and  no 
expression  of  opinion  on  his  part  are  admissible.  He  must 
never  allow  his  own  thoughts  to  appear ;  he  must  never 
correct  a  statement  however  erroneous  it  may  be ;  he  must 
never  offer  any  comment  however  helpful  to  the  solution  of 
the  point  at  issue.  He  must  not  add  to,  or  subtract  any- 
thing from,  the  events  related  and  the  opinions  expressed 
in  the  correspondence  itself. 

When  both  an  index  and  a  precis  of  certain  documents 
are  required,  the  index  should  be  compiled  before  any 
attempt  is  made  to  write  the  precis.  While  the  index 
gives  the  substance  or  pith  of  each  document  separately, 
the  precis  is  an  abridgment  or  summary  of  the  whole 
correspondence.  It  might  be  imagined,  therefore,  that  the 
precis  would  simply  prove  to  be  a  glorified  index.  The 
student  is  again  warned  against  this  not  uncommon  error. 
A  precis  must  never  be  a  mere  synopsis  or  list  of  headings, 
but  a  plain,  simple,  consecutive  narrative.  It  is  almost 
impossible  to  compile  a  satisfactory  precis  of  a  correspon- 
dence from  its  index,  and  recourse  should  be  had  to  the 
original  letters  themselves. 

E.  Brevity.  In  accordance  with  the  official  instructions 
already  quoted,  a  precis  should  be  'as  brief  as  is  compatible 
with  completeness  and  distinctness.'  In  ordinary  cases  a 
precis  of  a  correspondence  should  not  exceed  in  length 
one-twentieth  of  the  correspondence  itself.  When  one 
subject  alone  has  to  be  treated  it  will  not  be  found  difficult 
to  confine  the  precis  within  the  limit  indicated.  In  the 
case  of  two  or  more  separate  subjects  they  may  be  dealt 


with  in  different  paragraphs,  but  their  inter-relation  must 
be  shown  without,  however,  confusing  them. 

Brevity  can  only  be  acquired  by  practice.  A  precis 
should  not  be  overcrowded  with  facts,  and  the  student  will 
frequently  have  to  decide  which  of  several  details  to  accept 
and  which  to  refuse.  Adjectives  and  adverbs  will,  of 
course,  be  sparingly  used.  The  narrative  must  be  plain 
and  straightforward ;  it  should  be  a  mere  record  of  facts  in 
a  language  divested  of  all  verbose  adornment.  The  space 
allowed  is  strictly  limited,  and  this  limit  involves  a  rigid 
suppression  of  the  ornamental;  the  language  should  be  like 
gold  from  which  the  encompassing  sand  has  been  washed. 
There  must  be  lucidity  of  construction  combined  with  a  ! 
precision  of  expression,  calculated  to  produce  no  blurred 
effect  in  the  mind  of  the  reader,  who  should  be  enabled  to 
grasp  the  meaning  of  the  precis  without  effort. 

F.  Style.    And  yet,  when  due  attention  has  been  paid  to 
brevity  and  the  precis  has  been  written  within  the  limits 
prescribed,  the  language  must  not  be  halting  and  slipshod. 
The  precis  must  not  only  be  brief  and  distinct,  it  must  I 
also  be  grammatical,  readable  and,  if  possible,  interesting.  ( 
Each  sentence  must  be  grammatically  constructed.     In  the 
development  of  the  main  theme  there  should  be  an  easy 
transition  in  both  thought  and  expression  from  one  point 
to  another.     The  sentences  must  be  so  connected  as  to 
produce  an  easy  flow  and  certain  rhythm  of  language. 

The  precis  writer  will  probably  unconsciously  adopt  the 
style  of  the  correspondence  with  which  he  is  dealing,  and 
to  this  there  is  no  objection.  In  the  case  of  official  docu- 
ments the  style  will  be  formal ;  in  that  of  commercial 
correspondence  it  will  be  rather  conversational  in  character. 
In  both  cases  due  regard  must  be  paid  to  simplicity  and 
clearness  and  care  taken  to  avoid  circumlocution,  pleonasm, 
tautology  and  verbosity. 

It  is  obvious  that  for  proficiency  in  precis  writing  a 
knowledge  of  language  is  a  primary  requisite.  The  words 
allowed  are  few,  and  they  must  therefore  be  the  best 
possible.  The  student  should  have  a  copious  vocabulary 
from  which  to  select  if  he  is  to  express  his  meaning  with 
the  necessary  clearness,  brevity  and  precision.  In  this 
p.w.  B 


connection  the  use  of  short  words  of  Teutonic  origin  is  to 
be  preferred  to  the  employment  of  those  which  have  been 
introduced  from  the  Romance  languages.  In  precis  writing 
a  knowledge  of  synonyms  will  be  found  particularly  useful, 
while  the  terse  official  phrase,  even  if  hackneyed,  is  pecu- 
liarly expressive. 

The  younger  student  must  take  care  to  spell  correctly  ; 
the  more  advanced  student  should  be  careful  to  adhere  to 
conventional  spelling,  however  unscientific  he  may  consider 
it  to  be. 

Punctuation  is  of  considerable  importance,  and  the  proper 
use  of  stops  is  a  safeguard  against  confusion  and  misap- 
prehension. Long  sentences  should  be  avoided  and,  while 
an  even  flow  of  language  must  be  preserved,  the  words 
should  be  arranged  more  with  a  view  to  clearness  than 
to  cadence. 



No.  1.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  October  16,  1906.) 

The  Palace,  Valletta,  October  11,  1906. 

MY  LORD, — I  have  the  honour  to  forward  to  your  Lordship, 
for  submission  to  the  King,  the  accompanying  memorial 
addressed  to  His  Majesty  by  His  Grace  the  Archbishop,  Bishop 
of  Malta,  praying  that  His  Majesty  may  be  pleased  to  withhold 
his  approval  of  the  proposed  amendment  to  the  Royal  Instruc- 
tions, referred  to  in  paragraph  4  of  your  Lordship's  despatch  of 
the  15th  August  last. 

I  have,  etc.,  CHAS.  M.  CLARKE, 


(Translation.)  Enclosure  in  No.  1. 

To  His  Majesty  Edward  VII.,  by  the  Grace  of  God  King  of  the 
United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  Emperor  of 
India,  etc.,  etc. 

YOUR  MAJESTY, —The  Right  Honourable  the  Secretary  of 
State  for  the  Colonies,  Lord  Elgin,  in  a  despatch  from  Downing 
Street,  dated  the  15th  August  last,  and  published  in  the  English 
newspapers  only  recently,  informs  His  Excellency  the  Governor 
of  these  Islands  that  the  circumstances  connected  with  the 
mission  services  held  in  the  Theatre- Royal  at  Malta,  during  last 
May,  by  the  Rev.  John  M'Neill,  have  directed  the  attention  of  His 
Majesty's  Government  to  the  general  question  of  the  treatment 


of  different  religious  denominations  in  these  islands  ;  and  that, 
therefore,  His  Lordship  proposes  to  advise  Your  Majesty  to 
issue  Eoyal  Instructions  amending  the  present  Instructions 
by  the  insertion  of  the  following  clause  : — 

"  It  being  our  intention  that  all  persons  inhabiting  Our 
said  Island  should  have  full  liberty  of  conscience  and  the 
free  exercise  of  their  respective  modes  of  religious  worship, 
We  do  hereby  require  Our  said  Governor  and  Cominander- 
in-Chief  to  permit  all  persons  within  Our  said  Island  to 
have  such  liberty,  and  to  exercise  their  respective  modes  of 
religious  worship,  provided  they  be  contented  with  a  quiet 
and  peaceable  enjoyment  of  the  same,  not  giving  offence  or 
scandal  to  the  Government." 

YOUR  MAJESTY, — In  my  capacity  of  Bishop  of  this  Diocese, 
and,  consequently  of  spiritual  Head  of  the  whole  Island,  I 
permit  myself  to  humbly  ask  leave  to  bring  to  Your  Majesty's 
knowledge  that  no  severer  blow  can  be  struck  at  the  religious 
and  civil  sentiments  of  this  population,  which  has  ever  been 
most  loyal  to  the  Crown,  than  the  approval  of  the  proposed 
clause  regarding  the  liberty  of  religious  worship  in  this  Island, 
after  a  hundred  years  and  more  that  the  Island  has  been  under 
the  Government  of  Great  Britain  from  whom  it  has  always 
received  reiterated  and  solemn  promises  of  protection  of  the 
Catholic  Religion — promises,  the  existence  of  which  has  been 
recognised  by  the  present  Government,  and  admitted  recently 
by  the  Under  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies. 

YOUR  MAJESTY, — I  venture  to  hope  that  Your  Majesty  will 
dispense  me  from  enumerating  the  reasons  why  the  whole 
Island  felt  a  severe  shock  when  the  said  despatch  was  first 
announced.  Your  Majesty  will  allow  me  to  note  that,  here  in 
Malta,  the  right  of  exercising  religious  worship  in  public  has, 
for  more  than  a  century,  been  reserved  exclusively  to  the 
Catholic  Church,  and  this  has  been  admitted  by  nearly  all  the 
Governors  of  the  Island  each  and  every  time  that  my  pre- 
decessors and  myself  have  felt  it  our  duty  to  remonstrate  when- 
ever a  minister  belonging  to  another  Church  has  attempted  to 
perform  some  act  of  religious  worship  in  public. 

May  Your  Majesty,  therefore,  allow  me  to  make  a  humble, 
yet  earnest  prayer,  in  the  name  of  the  whole  population  which  I 
represent,  that  Your  Majesty  may  not  be  pleased  to  give  Your 
Royal  sanction  to  the  clause  proposed  by  Your  Majesty's 
Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies. 

Yours,  etc.,  P.  ARCIVESCOVO, 

Vescovo  di  Malta. 

Malta,  October  9,  1906. 


No.  2.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  November  1,  1906.) 

The  Palace,  Valletta,  October  27,  1906. 

My  LORD, — I  have  the  honour  to  enclose,  herewith,  copies  of 
the  resolution  passed  at  the  public  meeting  of  the  14th  instant, 
which  I  have  been  desired  by  the  President  and  Secretary  of 
the  meeting  to  forward  to  your  Lordship,  for  submission  to  His 
Majesty.  j  have?  etc ^  CHARLES  M.  CLARKE, 

Enclosure  in  No.  2. 

P      ,      i Translation  of  Resolution. 

That  it  is  the  opinion  of  this  meeting  that,  as  the  Maltese 
have  proclaimed  and  respected,  ever  since  1802,  the  principle 
of  religious  toleration,  as  appears  from  the  "Declaration  of 
Rights  of  the  Maltese  "  made  by  the  National  Congress  on  the 
15th  June,  1802  (Article  8),  the  imposition  with  which  we  are 
threatened  by  His  Majesty's  Government,  in  a  despatch  of  His 
Majesty's  Principal  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies  addressed 
to  His  Excellency  the  Governor  on  the  15th  August  last,  of  a 
law  placing  on  a  footing  of  equality  the  rights  of  the  religion  of 
the  Maltese  population,  the  Roman  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
religion,  which  has  always  been  dominant  in  these  Islands, 
with  those  of  all  other  creeds,  is  an  unprovoked  and  unnecessary 
act  of  violence,  prejudicial  to  the  rights  of  the  Maltese,  who, 
unconquered,  placed  their  country  and  themselves  under  the 
protection  of  the  British  Crown  ;  contrary  to  the  explicit  and 
implicit  promises  given  by  Great  Britain  in  the  name  of  the 
Sovereign,  in  the  Proclamation  of  General  Thomas  Graham  of 
the  19th  June,  1800,  in  that  of  General  Henry  Pigot  of  February, 
1801,  in  that  of  the  Royal  Commissioner  Charles  Cameron  of  the 
15th  July,  1801,  as  well  as  in  the  Notification  of  Governor  Sir 
Thomas  Maitland  of  the  5th  October,  1813,  and  other  Acts,  and 
in  violation  of  the  fundamental  principles  of  English  liberty,  the 
sentiment  of  the  population  having  in  no  way  been  consulted  ; 
and,  therefore,  this  meeting  formally  and  energetically  protests 
against  such  imposition,  respectfully  praying  His  Majesty  the 
King  to  spare  this  further  insult  to  the  loyalty  of  the  Maltese 
people  towards  the  British  Crown. 

No.  3.  The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor. 

Downing  Street,  November  3,  1 906. 

SIR, — I  have  the  honour  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your 
despatch  of  the  llth  ultimo,  forwarding  a  memorial  addressed 
to  His  Majesty  by  His  Grace  the  Archbishop  of  Malta,  praying 


that  His  Majesty  may  be  pleased  to  withhold  His  approval  of 
the  proposed  amendment  to  the  Royal  Instructions,  and  of  your 
despatch  of  the  27th  ultimo,  forwarding  copies  of  a  resolution 
to  a  similar  effect  passed  at  a  public  meeting  on  the  14th  ultimo. 
2.  I  have  to  request  you  to  inform  the  Archbishop,  and  the 
President  and  Secretary  of  the  meeting  that  the  petition  and 
resolution  have  been  laid  before  the  King,  and  I  am  commanded 
by  His  Majesty  to  state  that  he  has  been  pleased  to  give  no 
directions  thereon,  inasmuch  as  there  is  nothing  in  the  Addi- 
tional Instructions  now  passed  under  the  Royal  Sign  Manual 
and  Signet,  in  any  way  inconsistent  with  the  full  protection  of 
their  religion,  which  has  always  been  enjoyed  by  the  Roman 
Catholics  of  Malta. 

I  have,  etc.,  ELGIN. 

No.  4.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  November  12,  1906.) 

The  Palace,  Valletta,  November  7,  1906. 

MY  LORD, — I  have  the  honour  to  transmit  to  your  Lord- 
ship, together  with  an  English  translation,  the  accompanying 
memorial  which  I  have  been  desired  by  the  Members  of  the 
Cathedral  Chapter  of  Malta  to  forward  to  your  Lordship,  for 
submission  to  His  Majesty. 

2.  With  reference  to  the  last  paragraph  of  the  memorial,  it  is 
only  necessary  to  point  out  that  the  principle  of  equal  religious 
rights  for  all  subjects  of  His  Majesty  is  no  new  one,  even  in 
Malta,  inasmuch  as  it  was  laid  down  in  Clause  39  of  Her  late 
Majesty's  Instructions  to  Mr.  More  O'Ferrall,  dated  the  27th 
October,  1847,  and  in  paragraph  7  of  Lord  Grey's  despatch  of 
the  26th  November,  1847,  which  was  published  in  the  Malta 
Government  Gazette  of  the  5th  January,  1848. 

I  have,  etc.,  CHAS.  M.  CLARKE, 


(Translation.)  Enclosure  in  No.  4. 

To  His  Majesty  Edward  VII.,  King  of  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland,  and  of  the  British  Dominions  beyond  the  Seas, 
Emperor  of  India,  etc.,  etc.,  etc. 

MAY  IT  PLEASE  YOUR  MAJESTY, — We  the  undersigned  Canons 
of  the  Cathedral  Church  of  Malta  cannot  but  feel  deeply  pained 
on  learning  the  intention  (of  His  Majesty's  Government)  to 
place  the  religion  of  this  people — eminently  Roman  Catholic 
Apostolic — on  a  footing  of  equality  and  parity  with  all  other 
creeds  within  the  limits  of  this  Island. 

This  people,   which   spontaneously   placed  itself  under  the 


British  flag,  has  always,  up  to  the  present  time,  seen  its  religion 
— established  by  the  Apostle  Paul — privileged  and  pre-eminent 
in  this  Island,  not  only  under  various  other  denominations,  but 
also  under  the  100-years'  rule  of  unconquered  Albion,  in  accord- 
ance with  the  desire  manifested  ever  since  this  people  gave 
itself  to  the  British  Throne,  and  with  the  solemn  promises  made 
by  His  Britannic  Majesty's  representatives  on  different  occasions. 

The  suppression  of  this  privileged  position  cannot  but  expose 
this  Island  to  unpleasant  surprises  in  the  future  exercise  of  its 
public  worship,  especially  if,  at  any  time,  the  latter  were  to 
come  into  conflict,  or  were  simultaneous  with,  the  public  exercise 
of  other  creeds. 

Now,  therefore,  we,  the  members  composing  the  Chapter  of 
the  Cathedral— the  Chapter  to  which  he  belonged  who  was  the 
Head  of  the  Maltese  people  when  this  Island  spontaneously 
placed  itself  under  the  British  Flag— respectfully  appeal  to 
Your  Majesty,  praying  you  to  take  into  serious  consideration 
our  profound  grief  and  entreating  Your  Majesty  not  to  sanction 
the  law  in  contemplation  relating  to  the  freedom  of  public 
worship  in  our  Island. 

And  petitioners,  etc. 
Aula  Capitolaris, 

25th  October,  1906. 

















CAN.  G.  Eossi. 







No.  5.  The  Secretary  of  State  to  tJie  Governor. 

Downing  Street,  November  24,  1906. 

SIR, — I  have  the  honour  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  your 
despatch  of  the  7th  November,  forwarding  a  memorial  to  His 
Majesty  from  the  Cathedral  Chapter  of  Malta  on  the  subject  of 
the  position  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Malta. 

2.  I  have  to  refer  you,  in  reply,  to  my  despatch  of  the  3rd 
November,  in  which  I  communicated  to  you  His  Majesty's  reply 
to  a  previous  memorial  of  a  similar  character. 

I  have,  etc.,  ELGIN. 

No.  6.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  November  27,  1906.) 

The  Palace,  Valletta,  November  20,  1906. 
MY  LORD, — With  reference  to  Your  Lordship's  despatch  of 
the  3rd  inst.,  I  have  the  honour  to  transmit,  for  your  informa- 
tion, the  accompanying  copy  of  a  letter  which  I  have  received 
from  the  Archbishop,  Bishop  of  Malta,  in  reply  to  a  letter 
addressed  to  His  Grace  on  the  10th  instant,  in  accordance  with 
Your  Lordship's  instructions. 

I  have,  etc.,  CHAS.  M.  CLARKE, 


(Translation.)  Enclosure  in  No.  6. 

Archiepiscopal  Palace,  Valletta,  November  14,  1906. 

SIR, — I  have  received  your  esteemed  letter  of  the  10th  inst. 
In  reply,  I  cannot  but  express  my  deep  regret,  and  that  of  my 
parishioners,  at  the  liberty  of  religious  worship  which  has  been 
sanctioned  in  these  islands  against  all  our  expectations  by  the 
Government  of  Great  Britain,  after  a  century  and  more,  during 
which  the  exercise  of  religious  worship  in  public  has  been 
exclusively  reserved  to  the  Roman  Catholic  religion. 

I  have,  etc.,        P.  ARCIVESCOVO,  VESCOVO  DI  MALTA. 

To  His  Excellency  the  Governor  of  Malta. 






Serial  No. 





llth  October, 
Oct.  16.) 

The  Governor  of 
Malta  to 
The  Secretary  of 
State  for  the 

Transmitting  a  memorial 
from  the  Archbishop  of  Malta 
to  the  King,  praying  that  His 
Majesty  will  withhold  his 
approval  to  the  proposed 
insertion  in  the  Royal  In- 
structions of  a  clause  relating 
to  liberty  of  conscience  and 
religious  worship. 

Enclosure  1 
in  No.  1. 

9th  October, 

of  Malta  to 
The  King 

Memorial  referred  to  in 
No.  1. 


27th  October, 
Nov.  1.) 

The  Governor  of 
Malta  to 
The  Secretary  of 

Forwarding  copy  of  a  reso- 
lution passed  at  a  public 
meeting,  protesting  against 
the  imposition  of  a  law  placing 
the  Roman  Catholic  religion 
in  Malta  on  a  footing  of 
equality  with  those  of  all 
other  creeds. 

Enclosure  2 
in  No.  2. 


Secretary  of 
Meeting  to 
The  Governor  of 

Resolution  referred  to  in 
No.  2. 



The  Secretary  of 
State  to 
The  Governor  of 

Directing  that  the  Arch- 
bishop be  informed  that  His 
Majesty  has  given  no  direc- 
tions on  the  memorial  and 
resolution  enclosed  in  No.  1 
and  No.  2  respectively,  inas- 
much as  there  is  nothing  in 
the  new  Royal  Instructions 
in  any  way  inconsistent  with 
tbe  full  protection  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  religion  in 



Serial  No. 





Nov.  12.) 

The  Governor  of 
Malta  to 
The  Secretary  of 

Transmitting  a  memorial 
from  the  Cathedral  Chapter 
of  Malta,  praying  the  King 
not  to  sanction  the  proposed 
alteration  of  the  Royal  In- 

Enclosure  3 
in  No.  4. 


The  Cathedral 
of  Malta  to 
The  King 

Memorial  referred  to  in 
No.  4. 



The  Secretary  of 
State  to 
The  Governor  of 

Acknowledging  receipt  of 
No.  4  and  referring  in  reply 
to  No.  3. 


Nov.  27.) 

The  Governor  of 
Malta  to 
The  Secretary  of 

Enclosing  copy  of  a  letter 
from  the  Archbishop  of  Malta 
expressing  deep  regret  that 
religious  liberty  has  been 
sanctioned  in  the  island. 

Enclosure  4 
in  No.  6. 



The  Archbishop 
of  Malta  to 
The  Governor  of 

Letter  referred  to  in  No.  6. 



For  upwards  of  a  century  the  exercise  of  public  worship 
in  Malta  had  been  exclusively  reserved  to  members  of  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church,  when,  in  1906,  the  British  Govern- 
ment decided,  by  means  of  an  amendment  to  the  Royal 
Instructions,  to  grant  to  all  religious  denominations  in  the 
island  liberty  to  exercise  their  respective  modes  of  religious 

The  Roman  Catholics,  both  at  a  public  meeting  and 
through  their  Cathedral  Chapter,  protested  against  this 
decision,  on  the  ground  that  it  was  an  infringement  of  their 


rights,  and  petitioned  the  King  to  withhold  his  consent  to 
the  proposed  amendment. 

His  Majesty  was  advised,  however,  to  give  no  directions 
on  this  petition,  inasmuch  as  the  amendment  contained 
nothing  in  any  way  inconsistent  with  the  full  protection  of 
the  Roman  Catholic  religion. 


At  Bow  Street,  yesterday,  before  Sir  A.  de  Rutzen,  who  again 
sat  specially,  Mary  Robinson,  alias  Mary  Ann  Robinson,  was 
charged,  on  remand,  with  committing  wilful  and  corrupt  perjury 
in  the  evidence  which  she  gave  in  the  Druce  case  before  Mr. 
Plowden  at  Marylebone  and  Clerkenwell  Police  Courts. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews  (instructed  by  Mr.  Sims,  of  the  Treasury) 
appeared  on  behalf  of  the  Director  of  Public  Prosecutions.  The 
prisoner  was  not  legally  represented. 

Chief-inspector  Dew,  of  Scotland  Yard,  who  arrested  the 
prisoner  at  her  flat  in  Sisters  Avenue,  Clapham,  on  January  17, 
was  recalled  for  the  purpose  of  producing  the  documents,  etc., 
which  he  found  in  the  prisoner's  possession.  The  first  put  in 
was  a  certified  copy  of  the  prisoner's  birth  certificate,  showing 
that  she  was  born  at  East  Hill,  Wandsworth,  on  May  24,  1841, 
the  daughter  of  James  Webb,  a  butcher,  and  Ann  Webb, 
formerly  Voyce. 

A  woman  who  was  sitting  alone  at  the  back  of  the  Court  then 
rose  and  asked  the  Magistrate  if  she  might  be  allowed  to  see 
the  brooch  before  "the  lady  was  put  away."  She  mentioned 
that  she  was  rather  deaf. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — Perhaps  that  may  account  for  it.  We 
have  not  arrived  at  any  brooch  yet. 

The  witness  next  produced  a  certified  copy  of  a  marriage 
certificate  reciting  that  the  prisoner  in  the  name  of  Mary  Ann 
Webb  was  married  to  William  Robinson,  a  butcher,  at  Leeds, 
on  March  17,  1862,  her  father  being  described  as  a  police  super- 
intendent ;  the  birth  certificate  of  the  prisoner's  son,  James 
Henry  Webb  Robinson,  dated  September  27,  1866  ;  the  death 
certificate  of  Kate  Ellen  Robinson,  who  died  at  Lead  Hill, 
Worksop,  on  August  6,  1870,  aged  six  ;  the  birth  certificate  of 
Frederick  William  Robinson,  who  was  born  at  the  same  address 
in  May,  1872.  The  registration  of  that  birth  was  carried  out 
by  the  prisoner  herself,  and  the  witness  had  had  photographs 
taken  of  her  signature  in  the  register.  He  had  since  compared 
it  with  the  prisoner's  signature  to  her  depositions  taken  at  the 
hearing  of  the  Druce  case,  and  to  the  best  of  his  belief  they 


were  written  by  one  and  the  same  person.  The  witness  also 
put  in  a  photograph  showing  the  prisoner  with  two  of  her 
children.  He  said  he  obtained  it  from  the  prisoner's  sister, 
Mrs.  Woollaby. 

The  woman  who  had  previously  interrupted  the  proceedings 
rose  and  made  some  inaudible  remark. 

Mr.  Newton  (the  magistrate's  clerk)  asked  if  she  had  any- 
thing to  do  with  the  case. 

Inspector  Dew.  —Not  that  I  am  aware  of.  She  thinks  she  is 
entitled  to  some  millions  of  money. 

Continuing  his  evidence,  the  witness  produced  a  declaration 
made  by  the  prisoner  in  relation  to  a  fire  which  occurred  at  her 
residence,  Kent  House,  Thomas  Street,  New  Brighton  (N.Z.),  on 
February  20,  1906.  In  her  claim  she  set  out  her  losses  as 
follows :— Books,  £127  ;  pottery,  £220 ;  plate,  £44  10s. :  clothing, 
£77  11s.  ;  and  pictures,  £1,820. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews  observed  that  the  importance  of  that 
document  was  that  everything  of  value  was  said  to  have  been 

The  witness  said  that  from  receipts  which  he  had  found  the 
prisoner  appeared  to  have  obtained  the  full  amounts  of  her 
policies — namely,  £100  from  the  Sun  Fire  Insurance  Company, 
and  £400  from  the  Liverpool  and  London  and  Globe  Insurance 
Company  in  respect  of  that  fire. 


The  following  draft  of  a  letter  found  at  the  prisoner's  flat  was 
also  put  in  and  read  as  follows  : — 

"  Nov.  27,  1906. 

"To  Mr.  Druce.  Sir, — You  are  the  grandson  of  the  fifth 
Duke  of  Portland  without  a  doubt.  I  myself  was  secret  corre- 
spondent, arid  he  himself  acknowledged  to  me  when  ill,  and 
thought  his  end  had  come,  that  he  was  both  Druce  and  Duke  of 
P.;  that  he  had  children,  who  could  not  for  certain  reasons 
(things  that  had  happened  in  the  family)  be  brought  to  the 
front  by  himself.  I  can  positively  declare  that  Druce  and  the 
Duke  of  Portland  were  one  man.  I  knew  Mr.  Druce  personally 
when  a  girl,  through  my  mother  and  aunt  (1861  and  1862).  In 
1868  I  again  met  Mr.  Druce  as  Duke  of  Portland,  in  company 
with  Mr.  Dickens  in  Sherwood  Forest,  Welbeck  Abbey,  and 
remembered  him  well.  My  aunt  had  already  told  me  the  man 
I  had  to  deal  with  was  known  by  these  two  names.  As  corre- 
spondent to  the  duke  (I  then  lived  in  Worksop)  I  received 
letters  under  cover  addressed  Mr.  Druce,  etc.  These  were  from 
the  Continent  and  were  sent  to  me  by  Mr.  Dickens  to  be  given 
to  the  Duke  of  P.  at  some  appointed  place.  All  letters  addressed 


to  the  Duke  of  Portland  were  delivered  to  him  at  the  abbey. 
You  will  hear  by  this  mail  from  Mr.  Harper,  a  Christchurch 
solicitor,  a  lot  of  news.  The  Lyttleton  Times  received  a  cable 
dated  October  30,  that  the  Druce  case  was  settled  financially 
and  no  more  would  be  heard  of  the  case.  This  news  I  hear 
from  Mr.  Harper.  A  man  from  Liverpool  visited  the  Baker 
Street  Bazaar,  1869,  month  August.  The  Duke  of  P.  was  in 
London  at  that  time,  both  at  the  beginning  and  end  of  the 

The  inspector  also  produced  the  letter,  which  was  a  reply  to 
the  above,  dated  from  65  London  Wall,  London,  E.G.,  January 
11,  1907  :— 

"  Mrs.  Eobinson,  Rironi,  Falsgrove  Street,  Sydenham,  Christ- 
church,  New  Zealand.  Dear  Madam, — I  am  greatly  pleased  at 
receipt  of  your  letter  of  November  27  last,  the  contents  of  which 
are  of  the  utmost  importance  to  the  matter  in  hand.  It 
is  quite  untrue,  and  there  is  no  foundation  for  the  statement, 
that  the  case  has  been  settled  financially  or  any  other  way 
beyond  the  fact  that  certain  inquiries  were  made  in  Melbourne 
of  the  relatives  of  the  claimant,  which  would  indicate  in  the 
minds  of  our  opponents  there  had  arisen  the  possibility  that  at 
some  future  date  a  proposition  for  a  settlement  might  be  inevit- 
able. We  know  nothing  of  any  suggestion  of  settlement  arising 
either  from  them  or  from  us,  so  that  you  may  take  it  definitely 
and  distinctly  that  the  case  is  proceeding  and  will  be  heard  in 
the  Courts,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  at  a  very  early  date.  There  will, 
however,  be  plenty  of  time  to  enable  you  to  personally  attend 
and  give  evidence  of  the  facts  set  forth  in  your  letter,  and  you 
could  hardly  fail  to  appreciate  how  vital  it  is  to  the  interests  of 
the  claimant  that  you  should  do  so.  Knowing  nothing  of  you 
personally  or  of  your  circumstances,  it  is  difficult  for  me  to 
forecast  what  may  be  your  attitude  towards  a  proposition  that 
you  should  so  personally  attend  in  London  to  give  evidence,  but 
I  sincerely  trust  that  any  personal  inconvenience  which  such  a 
course  may  involve  you  in  will  be  considered  as  something 
which  you,  in  justice,  should  undertake,  in  order  to  furnish 
what  no  other  than  yourself  is  able  to  furnish — that  is,  the 
facts  that  you  relate  in  your  letter.  You  may  rest  assured  that 
any  expense  which  you  may  be  involved  in  by  making  the 
journey,  either  by  way  of  passage  money  or  expenses  connected 
with  the  passage,  the  relinquishment  of  any  employment  upon 
which  you  may  be  engaged,  or  the  disturbance  to  your  domestic 
or  household  arrangements  or  business  affairs,  will  be  liberally 
compensated  for  in  return  for  your  undertaking  the  fatigue  and 
upset  of  such  a  journey.  If  you  are  required  to  remain  in. 


London  for  any  length  of  time  your  convenience  will  be  simi- 
larly considered.  I  am  not  yet  in  receipt  of  any  communication 
from  Mr.  Harper,  the  solicitor,  of  Christchurch,  whom  you 
mention,  and  pending  such  information  as  his  letter  may  convey 
there  are  a  great  many  questions  which  naturally  arise  upon 
the  reading  of  your  letter  and  in  respect  to  which  I  have  no 
doubt  you  could  furnish  full  details  and  most  valuable  infor- 
mation. I  must  content  myself,  however,  for  the  present  with 
awaiting  the  receipt  of  Mr.  Harper's  letter,  which  I  sincerely 
hope  will  come  to  hand  next  week.  If  it  does  not,  you  must 
allow  me,  in  my  letter  next  mail,  to  put  to  you  a  series  of  ques- 
tions which  it  is  desired  you  should  answer  whenever  you  may 
be  called  upon  to  give  evidence.  ...  I  am  quite  at  a  loss  to 
understand  why  your  endeavours  to  get  into  communication 
with  Mr.  Druce  met  with  so  little  success.  It  may  be  that  you 
addressed  them  to  the  solicitors  engaged  in  the  former  litiga- 
tion, who  would  no  doubt  be  unwilling  to  assist  the  present 
claim  which  is  in  opposition  to  that  originally  set  up  by  Mrs. 
Anna  Maria  Druce.  I  wired  you  yesterday,  as  per  copy 
enclosed,  the  intention  of  the  wire  being  that  you  should 
estimate  the  expenses  necessarily  incurred  in  your  attending  in 
London  to  personally  assist  me  with  your  intimate  knowledge 
of  the  duke's  affairs,  and  enable  me  to  test  the  accuracy  of  a 
number  of  statements  which  I  have  from  others  respecting 
same.  If  you  reply  to  that  telegram  fixing  an  amount,  I  shall, 
of  course,  infer  from  the  reply  that  you  are  willing  on  payment 
of  that  amount  to  attend  in  London  as  desired.  If  not,  let  me 
again  urge  upon  you  that  in  a  matter  of  such  enormous  import- 
ance it  would  not  be  right  for  you  to  allow  any  consideration  of 
personal  convenience  to  stand  in  the  way  of  elucidation  of  the 
real  facts  of  the  case,  and  I  trust  that  you  will  take  this  view  of 
the  matter.  Of  course,  if  you  find  any  insuperable  objection  to 
making  the  journey  to  London,  I  shall  have  to  content  myself 
with  asking  you  to  attend  your  solicitor,  Mr.  Harper,  and 
enable  him  to  place  your  statement  before  a  commissioner 
specially  appointed  by  the  English  Court  for  that  purpose. 
The  expenses  involved  in  this  proceeding  will  be  very  much 
less  than  that  necessarily  involved  in  your  making  the  journey, 
but  the  result  will  be  nothing  like  so  satisfactory  to  the  real 
nature  of  the  inquiry.  I  put  my  appeal  to  you,  therefore,  on 
higher  grounds  than  those  of  the  personal  interest  of  the 
claimant.  The  facts  of  the  Druce-Portland  case  have  long 
ceased  to  be  a  matter  for  personal  concern,  and  have  become  a 
subject  of  such  great  public  interest  and  involve  so  many 
individuals  in  serious  consequences  one  way  or  the  other  that  I 
feel  sure  you  will  look  at  the  matter  as  one  of  abstract  justice 


and  act  accordingly.     I   have   the  honour  to   remain,  Yours 

The  witness  said  that  that  letter  was  unsigned,  but  the 
address  from  which  it  was  dated  was  at  that  time  the  office 
of  G.  H.  Druce  (Limited).  He  next  produced  several  telegrams 
which  were  sent  to  the  prisoner  in  New  Zealand.  The  first, 
dated  Jan.  10,  1907,  and  received  in  Christchurch  (N.Z.)  next 
day,  ran  : — 

"  What  amount  money  required  ?  Pay  all  necessary  expenses 
for  you  to  come  home  as  soon  as  possible.  Wire  date  of 
departure  and  steamer.  Case  now  proceeds.  GEORGE  HOL- 

The  next  was  dated  Jan.  31,  1907  :— 

"Received  your  letter  last  mail  to  the  satisfaction  of  all 
concerned.  All  papers  connected  with  your  evidence  absolutely 
must  come.  You  must  maintain  absolute  secrecy  everything 
relating  to  the  subject  referred  to.  Take  every  possible  care 
books  and  papers.  COBURN." 

Another  telegram  was  sent  from  London  to  Montevideo  on 
March  4,  1907  :— 

"  Mary  Robinson,  passenger,  s.s.  Rimutaka.  Will  meet  you 
at  Plymouth  and  give  you  my  card.  Take  no  notice  of  any 
one.  GEORGE  DRUCE." 

On  March  28  the  following  telegram  was  sent  to  the  prisoner 
at  Plymouth  : — 

"  Am  sorry  unable  to  meet  you  as  promised.  Have  deputed 
my  solicitor,  Mr.  Kimber,  to  do  so  with  Mr.  Coburn,  who  will 
present  you  with  my  card.  Hope  the  documents  quite  safe  and 
remain  in  your  custody.  DRUCE." 

Receipts  were  also  put  in  showing  that  from  May  18  down  to 
about  the  end  of  September  the  prisoner  received  £3  19s.  a 
week,  the  money  being  generally  paid  by  Mr.  Kimber,  and 
once  or  twice  by  Mr.  Druce.  There  was  also  a  letter  from 
Mr.  E.  Kimber,  the  prisoner's  former  solicitor,  as  follows  : — 
"15,  Walbrook,  E.G.,  London,  May  7,  1907. 

"  Dear  Miss  Robinson, — I  have  this  afternoon  been  served  by 
the  New  Zealand  Shipping  Company  with  notice  of  an  applica- 
tion by  them  to  the  Commercial  Judge  for  the  speedy  trial  of 
your  action  against  them  for  the  recovery  of  the  lost  letters  of 
Mr.  Charles  Dickens  and  the  late  Duke  of  Portland  to  you.  In 
one  aspect  of  the  case  this  would  be  advantageous,  but  in  another 
it  will  be  disadvantageous,  unless  we  can  get  out  of  them  the 
grounds  of  their  defence,  which  it  may  be  possible  to  do.  How- 
ever, I  will  speak  to  you  about  this  when  I  have  the  pleasure  of 
seeing  you. — Yours  faithfuly,  E.  KIMBER." 


The  next  document  was  a  letter  from  Mr.  Kimber  to  Messrs. 
Oswald,  Smith  &  Hanson,  the  prisoner's  personal  solicitors  : — 

"  Dear  Sir, — I  duly  received  yours  of  the  21st  inst.  I  will 
request  that  a  cheque  be  sent  to  Miss  Robinson  at  once.  Will 
you  be  good  enough  to  remind  her  that  she  has  not  answered 
several  of  my  letters,  especially  the  last,  in  which  I  told  her  the 
importance  of  getting  the  brooch  and  the  ring  valued  by  a 
jeweller.  This  is  for  the  purpose  of  exposing  Avory's  slander." 

[It  will  be  recalled  that  at  the  hearing  of  the  Druce  case  Mr. 
Horace  Avory  described  the  brooch  as  a  twopenny-halfpenny 


The  witness  said  that  he  also  found  at  the  prisoner's  flat  notes 
of  a  sort  of  diary  which  the  prisoner  kept  in  New  Zealand : 
"Feb.  4. — Received  large  parcel.  Found  two  booklets  of  the 
same  firm.  Feb.  6. — Go  to  Mr.  Harper,  and  deliver  to  him  the 
letter  and  booklets  ;  also  copy  of  letter  and  journal.  Wanted 
to  know  whether  money  was  sure.  Harper  looked  very  much 
worried,  as  though  he  had  had  a  fright.  Lodgings  visited  by 
a  detective  making  inquiries.  Three  other  men  making  a  survey 
of  the  premises." 

The  next  document  produced  was  a  note  which,  in  the  opinion 
of  the  witness,  was  in  Mr.  Kimber's  handwriting  :  "  Miss  R. 
was  not  surprised  at  what  Mr.  Dickens  told  her  in  Hyde  Park, 
because  she  said  she  heard  a  great  many  things  from  the  work- 
men. What  were  these  things  ?  Anything  abqut  Resurrection, 
or  something  else."  The  next  was  the  draft  agreement  between 
the  Druce  Company  and  Mary  Robinson  as  follows  : — 

"(1)  To  pay  Mrs.  Eldred  the  money  she  requires  of  the  Druce 
Company  for  my  shelter  in  her  house  and  the  food  she  has 
supplied  me  with  since  I  was  taken  there  by  Druce,  until  I  am 
removed  from  54  Talbot  Road,  Bayswater." 

Sir  Charles  Mathews  mentioned  that  Mrs.  Eldred  was  the 
landlady  of  that  address. 

The  agreement  continued  : — 

"  (2)  That  I  am  removed  from  this  place,  54  Talbot  Road,  to 
more  quiet  apartments  or  small  cottage,  where  my  nervous 
system  may  get  proper  rest.  The  rent  to  be  paid  by  the  Druce 

"(3)  That  wages  are  required  for  my  assistance  to  the 
company's  solicitor  and  for  information  to  him,  and  for  the  use 
of  my  journal.  My  board  and  travelling  expenses  must  be  paid 
for  me  at  the  rate  of  £3  3s.  weekly." 

"  (4)  At  the  final  of  the  Druce  Company's  trial  an  equal  pro- 


portion  of  money  is  to  be  paid  to  me,  by  the  same  proportion  as 
will  be  paid  to  all  others  connected  with  the  case,  according  to 
the  value  of  their  work." 

The  witness  said  he  also  found  a  copy  of  the  Idler  for 
November,  1906,  which  contained  an  article  on  the  fifth  Duke 
of  Portland,  and  his  brothers  and  sisters,  by  "  One  Who  Knew 
Them  "  ;  also  fourteen  picture  postcards  with  views  of  Worksop 
and  its  neighbourhood  ;  an  envelope  containing  Sissons's  penny 
illustrated  guide  to  the  Dukeries,  addressed  to  the  prisoner,  with 
the  postmark  October  26,  1907  ;  a  small  engraving  taken  from  a 
book  of  Gadshill  Place,  near  Rochester,  Kent,  the  residence  of 
Charles  Dickens  until  his  death  ;  White's  Year-Book  for  Work- 
sop,  1906,  containing  a  chronicle  of  the  important  events 
connected  with  the  neighbourhood  for  many  years  past ;  a 
pencil  memorandum  dealing  with  the  geographical  position  of 
Colombo  and  a  short  history  of  the  place. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews  observed  that  Colombo  was  the  place 
where  the  prisoner's  daughter,  Miss  Maud  O'Neil,  was  said  to 
have  been  born. 

The  witness  next  handed  in  a  pencil  memorandum  apparently 
of  Charles  Dickens's  movements  as  follows  : — "  November. — 
Arrived  in  Boston,  1867.  Had  reception  more  than  cordial,  for 
it  was  his  second  visit.  Made  a  great  success  with  his  readings 
and  covered  a  lot  of  country,  and  the  fatigue  and  excitement 
excessive.  He  made  more  friends  than  money.  He  arrived  in 
England  May,  1868,  better,  as  he  said,  for  the  sea  voyage. 
People  said  he  looked  seven  years  younger.  In  October  follow- 
ing he  commenced  to  travel  and  start  his  readings.  Thinking 
the  old  ones  would  not  do  to  rely  upon,  he  tried  a  few  new  ones. 
But  the  strain  was  great.  In  February,  1869,  he  was  back  in 
London  reading  at  St.  James's  Hall  and  the  district  until  the 
middle  of  April.  His  health  failed  and  he  rested.  In  1870, 
from  January  to  March,  he  gave  twelve  farewell  readings,  the 
last  on  March  15,  at  St.  James's  Hall,  the  readings  selected 
being  'The  Christmas  Carol'  and  'The  Trial  Scene  from  Pick- 
wick.' "  Another  memorandum  read  : — 

"  In  the  prints  you  sent  to  me  I  can  truthfully  say  they  are 
both  good  of  the  same  man,  one  in  a  disguised  form,  the  other 
in  a  more  natural.  I  knew  them  both  in  their  true  colours  too 
well  to  forget  their  faces.  The  eyes  and  the  forehead  are  the 
same.  I  have  seen  the  fifth  Duke  of  Portland  without  a  beard, 
with  a  short  beard,  and  a  long  one.  Mr.  Druce  in  his  short 
beard  was  as  I  saw  him  when  11  years  of  age.  He  then  carried 
on  the  Baker  Street  Bazaar.  When  11  years  of  age  and  travelling 
with  my  aunt,  who  was  a  friend  of  Mr.  Druce's,  we  met  him 
frequently.  He  always  took  a  great  deal  of  notice  of  me  on 



account  of  my  father  being  killed  in  the  American  war.  I 
distinctly  reniemember  being  in  his  company  for  the  first  time. 
It  was  at  Tunbridge  Wells.  His  beard  attracted  my  attention. 
It  was  so  beautifully  groomed,  and  such  a  striking  likeness  in 
the  forehead  and  eyes  to  my  aunt  that  people  thought  they  were 
related  to  each  other  April  26. — Richmond,  Surrey,  Star  and 
Garter. — Mr.  Druce  was  here  with  -  — .  May,  1868. — Boston, 
Dickens.  October,  1868. — Welbeck,  Dickens.  February,  March, 
1869. — Dickens  in  London  somewhere.  April,  1869. — A  copy 
certificate  from  Mr.  Dickens.  July,  1869. — Mr.  Dickens  better; 
writing  a  book ;  wrote  badly.  Mr.  Druce  said  Dickens  failing 
fast.  October. — Mr.  Dickens  seemed  much  better  for  his  rest. 
December,  January,  February,  1870. — Letters  from  Mr.  Dickens 
to  Mr.  Druce  and  myself.  March. — Mr.  Dickens  in  London. 
.  .  .  April  1. — Mr.  Dickens  near  Hyde  Park;  looks  very  ill. 
Would  be  in  or  near  London  until  end  of  May." 


The  next  was  a  letter  to  the  prisoner  from  Mr.  E.  Kimber, 
dated  from  15,  Walbrook,  E.G.,  London,  December  6,  1907  :— 

"  Dear  Miss  Robinson, — Would  you  like  to  give  some  of  your 
reminiscences  of  Charles  Dickens  to  the  publishers,  Messrs. 
George  Newnes  (Limited)  ?  If  so,  I  will  give  them  your  address. 
I  did  not  like  to  do  so  without  communicating  with  you.  It 
might  do  you  good.  Both  Sir  George  and  Lady  Newnes  have 
been  in  Court  on  the  Bench,  and  I  have  strong  reason  to  believe 
that  they  sympathise  both  with  you  and  the  case.  They  are 
friends  of  two  of  my  daughters.  Yours  faithfully,  EDMUND 

Another  letter  addressed  to  "  W.  Gadsby"  at  Welbeck,  which 
was  also  among  the  prisoner's  possessions,  was  read  :  — "  I 
intended  to  have  written  to  you  yesterday.  Of  course,  you 
may  go  the  day  Lord  Harewood  desires.  You  had  better  not,  I 
should  think,  move  your  family.  You  may  do  as  you  please 
till  you  have  seen  for  certain  whether  you  will  suit  Lord  Hare- 
wood,  since,  if  not,  you  may  come  back  to  me.  With  regard  to 
your  conduct,  my  advice  is  that  you  keep  a  regular  register  of 
everything  of  consequence  which  comes  under  your  observation. 
Be  particularly  careful  never  to  state  a  fact  you  are  not  certain 
of  or  give  an  opinion  which  is  not  founded  on  a  fact  and  the 
plain  consequence  of  that  fact.  When  your  memory  fails  you, 
or  you  have  not  good  reasons  for  an  opinion,  say  so  at  once. — 




The  witness  also  produced  a  proof  of  the  prisoner's  evidence  in 
which  it  was  recorded  that  she  had  been  the  mistress  of  the  fifth 
Duke  of  Portland  ;  that  in  1876  the  duke  gave  her  £5,000  in 
bank  notes  at  Aberdeen,  and  that  the  duke  had  given  her  other 
money  upon  the  interest  of  which  she  was  now  living  at  the  date 
that  that  proof  was  taken.  There  was  also  a  proof  of  Miss 
O'Neil,  which  described  her  as  the  companion  of  Miss  Eobinson 
and  stated  that  she  was  born  in  Colombo.  Also  copies  of  three 
letters  purporting  to  have  been  sent  to  the  prisoner  by  the  fifth 
Duke  of  Portland.  The  first  ran  :  — 

"  My  dearest  Mary, — I  remember  this,  that,  though  you  were 
ndt  the  wife  of  my  youth,  you  are  the  joy  of  my  life.  You  are 
the  most  worthy  of  all  my  earthly  comforts.  You  possess  what 
I  most  admire  in  a  woman — sweetness  and  cheerfulness,  mixed 
with  kindness  of  manner.  For  your  study  I  recommend  some 
of  the  most  useful  parts  of  mathematics.  In  my  eye,  they  arc  a 
special  object  of  interest.  .  .  .  Farewell,  my  dearest,  from  your 
affectionate  and  dearest  friend,  JOHN  0.  S.  BENTINCK,  Welbeck 
Abbey,  1874." 

In  reply  to  Sir  Charles,  the  witness  said  that  he  believed  the 
Duke  of  Portland  succeeded  to  the  dukedom  in  1854. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — Notwithstanding  that,  the  letter  is 
signed  "John  C.  S.  Bentinck." 

The  second  letter  was  read  as  follows : — 

"  My  dearest  Mary, — You  will  see  me  in  Eichmond  some  of 
these  fine  mornings.  I  feel  lost  here  alone.  I  cannot  live  with- 
out your  presence.  The  smallpox  is  in  and  near  the  neighbour- 
hood of  Worksop  ;  therefore  you  must  remain  where  you  are  at 
present.  I  should  never  forgive  myself  if  anything  happened 
to  you  through  that  dreadful  disease.  From  your  most  affec- 
tionate friend,  JOHN  CAVENDISH  SCOTT  BENTINCK,  Welbeck 
Abbey,  March,  1871." 

The  third  letter  ran  : — 

"  Dearest  Mary, — I  shall  see  you  in  course  of  a  few  days  ;  so 
be  prepared.  I  cannot  stay  any  longer.  Your  affectionate  and 
ever-loving  friend,  JOHN  BENTINCK,  February,  1870." 

The  witness  also  produced  the  following  letter  which  pur- 
ported to  have  been  written  by  Charles  Dickens  in  March, 

"  Dear  Mary,—  You  will  be  watched.  Every  word  you  say 
will  be  weighed  in  the  balance  against  you.  You  must  be  tight- 
fisted  and  hard  as  a  grindstone,  and  then  you  will  succeed  in 
throwing  them  off  guard.  If  you  act  in  this  manner,  you  will  be 


the  means  of  saving  a  deal  of  trouble  and  anxiety  to  Resurrection. 
You  may  thank  God  there  are  no  Mrs.  Gamps  in  the  affair  as 
general  news-letters. — Yours  faithfully,  CHARLES  DICKENS." 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — I  pause  here  to  ask  you,  inspector, 
since  this  search  of  yours  the  prisoner,  at  her  own  wish,  has  seen 
you  and  made  a  statement,  has  she  not  ? 

The  witness. — Yes,  she  has,  Sir  Charles. 

And  has  confessed  to  you  that  the  evidence  she  gave  in  the 
witness-box  was  false  ?— Yes. 

And  that  these  letters  in  her  handwriting  were  concocted  by 
her  ?— So  far  as  the  Duke  of  Portland  was  concerned. 

Yes. — Did  she  say  she  had  received  the  original  of  the  letter 
purporting  to  come  from  Mr.  Dickens  ? — Yes. 

But  you  can  find  no  trace  of  it  ? — No. 


The  witness  went  on  to  say  that  he  also  took  possession  of  the 
following  draft  document  from  among  the  prisoner's  papers : — 

"July  21,  1907.  Mr.  Kimber,  Dear  Sir, — I  remember  some- 
thing which  my  second  journal  contained.  The  pith  of  it  is 
this — it  was  told  to  me  by  the  fifth  Duke  of  Portland,  regarding 
his  boyish  days  as  he  called  them. — The  reason  I  took  the  name 
of  Druce  was  through  being  introduced  to  a  man  of  that  name 
by  some  gentlemen  friends.  The  man  was  interesting.  I 
believe  he  was  Irish.  He  was  a  navy  agent,  and  had  a  wife, 
whom  he  called  Judy.  Our  visits  to  his  house  were  frequent 
and  rowdy.  We  made  our  way  to  the  hall  through  under 
passage,  etc.  Now  after  a  lot  of  trouble  and  searching  Miss 
O'Neil  and  myself  have  discovered  the  following  places : — The 
door  of  the  underground  passage  in  a  back  yard.  The  vault  of 
the  navy  agent,  Druce,  and  his  wife,  Judy.  Grave  of  the  lady 
who  was  the  wife  of  the  physician  who  lived  at  Bury  St. 
Edmunds  at  that  time." 

Sir  Charles  Mathews  then  read  from  a  document,  which  was 
headed  "  Deposition  of  Miss  Mary  Robinson."  It  stated  that  she 
was  56  years  of  age  ;  that  she  was  born  in  Richmond,  Virginia, 
U.S.A.,  where  her  father  was  a  tobacco  planter  ;  that  her  first 
acquaintance  with  Thomas  Charles  Druce  was  in  April,  1862, 
when  she  was  introduced  to  him  .at  the  Star  and  Garter  Hotel, 
Richmond.  The  document  concluded  : — "  I  kept  and  still  have 
in  my  possession  a  diary,  in  which  I  recorded  many  things 
about  my  meetings  with  him,  and  what  I  had  to  do  for  him." 
Counsel  pointed  out  that  that  was  only  a  draft  document.  In 
the  "  information "  which  the  prisoner  swore  before  Mr. 
Plowden  she  gave  a  different  version  of  her  first  acquaintance 


with  T.  C.  Druce— namely,  that  it  was  in  December,  1861,  that 
she  was  first  introduced  to  him,  at  Tunbridge  Wells.  The 
statement  as  to  her  diary  was  also  altered  to  the  following  : — 
"  I  kept,  and  am  able  to  produce,  a  diary,  in  which  I  recorded 
many  things  about  my  meeting  with  him,  and  what  I  had  to  do 
for  him,  and  the  dates  I  have  furnished  are  taken  by  me  from 
the  entries  in  that  diary."  There  was  also  a  letter  from  Messrs. 
Oswald,  Smith,  and  Hanson  advising  the  prisoner  to  call  on  Mr. 
Kimber,  and  inform  him  in  what  respect  her  first  proof  was 
incorrect,  and  two  letters  from  Mr.  Perry  Allen,  an  American 
attorney,  acting  on  behalf  of  Mr.  Eobert  Caldwell,  in  which  he 
enclosed  a  copy  of  the  prisoner's  diary.  The  letter  advised  the 
prisoner  to  have  the  original  document  placed  in  a  safe  deposit 

The  prisoner  was  then  remanded  till  Monday,  Sir  Charles 
intimating  that  he  would  then  have  to  recall  Inspector  Dew  to 
produce  further  documents. 

In  reply  to  the  magistrate,  the  prisoner  said  she  had  nothing 
to  ask  the  witness. 



On  February  19,  1908,  at  Bow  Street,  the  charge  of 
perjury  against  Mary  Ann  Robinson  in  connection  with 
the  Druce  case  was  further  investigated. 

Chief  Inspector  Dew,  of  Scotland  Yard,  produced  a 
number  of  documents  found  in  the  prisoner's  possession  ,at 
the  time  of  her  arrest — among  them  certified  copies  of  her 
birth  certificate  (showing  that  she  was  the  daughter  of 
James  Webb,  butcher,  and  was  born  at  Wandsworth  in 
1841),  and  of  her  marriage  to  William  Robinson,  butcher, 
at  Leeds,  in  1862.  The  witness  said  that  since  the  docu- 
ments had  been  examined  the  prisoner  had  seen  him  by 
her  own  wish,  and  had  confessed  that  her  evidence  was  false. 

The  prisoner  was  again  remanded. 



The  City  of  London  Conservative  Association  yesterday 
entertained  Mr.  Balfour  and  Sir  F.  Banbury,  the  members  of 
Parliament  for  the  City,  at  luncheon  in  the  Merchant  Taylors' 

Sir  Joseph  Dimsdale  presided ;  and  among  those  present  were 
Lord  Lansdowne,  Lord  Valentia,  M.P.,  Lord  Aldenham,  Lord 
Midleton,  Sir  R.  Finlay,  K.C.,  Lord  Duncannon,  the  Hon.  H. 
C.  Gibbs,  Lord  Addington,  Sir  H.  Kimber,  the  Hon.  Evelyn 
Hubbard,  Sir  R.  Hermon-Hodge,  Sir  J.  Lawrence,  the  Hon. 
Claude  Hay,  M.P.,  Mr.  C.  S.  Gordon  Clark  (Master,  Merchant 
Taylors'  Company),  Mr.  W.  Hayes  Fisher,  the  Hon.  L.  A. 
Brodrick,  Sir  J.  Whittaker  Ellis,  Sir  J.  H.  Puleston,  Mr. 
Prichard  Jones,  Sir  F.  Dixon-Hartland,  M.P.,  Sir  Forrest 
Fulton,  K.C.,  Sir  C.  Kinloch  Cooke,  Mr.  F.  S.  Hanson,  Sir  T. 
Birkin,  Major  E.  F.  Coates,  M.P.,  Sir  G.  W.  Truscott,  Mr.  W. 
Keswick,  Mr.  J.  C.  Czarnikovv,  Mr.  A.  C.  Cole,  Mr.  J.  S. 
Sandars,  Mr.  W.  M.  Short,  Sir  G.  Woodman,  Mr.  R.  Davies, 
Major  W.  Bridges  Webb,  Mr.  H.  W.  Russell,  Sir  J.  J.  Runtz, 
Sir  J.  Purcell,  Mr.  H.  Seymour  Foster,  Mr.  George  Alexander, 
Mr.  A.  Cohen,  Mr.  J.  W.  Domoney,  Mr.  A.  Moseley,  Sir  H. 
Homewood  Crawford,  Mr.  Luck  (hon.  treasurer,  City  of  London 
Conservative  Association),  Mr.  E.  G.  Simmonds,  Mr.  Percival 
Hughes,  Mr.  R.  M.  Sebag  Montefiore,  Mr.  H.  J.  Waterlow,  Mr. 
A.  F.  Blades,  Mr.  J.  F.  Rawlinson,  K.C.,  M.P.,  Sir  T.  Jackson, 
Captain  Swinton,  Sir  T.  Brooke-Hitching,  Sir  J.  Roper  Parking- 
ton,  Mr.  W.  W.  Grantham,  Mr.  G.  Glanfield,  Mr.  W.  J. 
Galloway,  Mr.  Millar  Wilkinson,  Mr.  Baddeley,  Mr.  J.  L. 
Sayer,  and  Mr.  Pearce  Morrison.  A  number  of  ladies,  among 
whom  were  Lady  Lansdowne  and  Lady  Dimsdale,  entered  the 
hall  after  the  luncheon  and  listened  to  the  speeches  from  the 

After  the  loyal  toasts  had  been  drunk, 

The  Chairman,  in  proposing  that  of  "  The  Representatives  of 
the  City  of  London  in  Parliament,"  said  that  in  Sir  Frederick 
Banbury  they  had  a  member  who  was  no  novice  to  Parlia- 
mentary life,  and  who  was  entirely  conversant  with  Parlia- 
mentary procedure.  (Laughter  and  cheers.)  It  was  to  a  large 
extent  owing  to  his  experience  that  he  was  able  to  stop,  if  not 
to  kill,  a  great  deal  of  what  now  was  erroneously  called  legis- 
lation in  the  twentieth  century.  In  Mr.  Balfour  they  had  an 
ideal  member.  (Cheers.)  For  many  years  East  Manchester  had 
the  honour  of  claiming  him  as  her  representative.  It  was  owing 
to  the  ingratitude  of  East  Manchester  and  the  self-abnegation 


and  patriotism  of  Lord  Aldenham  (cheers),  then  Mr  Alban 
Gibbs,  who  had  long  represented  the  City  of  London  in  Parlia- 
ment as  successor  to  his  revered  and  ever  to  be  lamented  father, 
that  they  were  able  that  day  to  greet  Mr.  Balfour  as  senior 
member  for  tha  City  of  London.  But  Mr.  Balfour  was  a  great 
deal  more  than  a  mere  member  of  Parliament.  He  was  the 
trusted  leader  (cheers)  of  the  great  Imperial  party  of  this 
country.  He  was  a  politician  and  he  was  also  a  great  states- 
man— terms  which  were  by  no  means  synonymous.  They  had 
seen  politicians,  little  more  than  Parliamentary  hacks,  climb  to 
the  highest  position  in  the  State,  and  yet  possess  no  grain  of 
statesmanship.  Vituperation  and  abuse  were  not  statesman- 
ship. To  pander  or  to  be  pliable  to  the  demands  of  the  dema- 
gogue or  the  stump  orator  was  not  statesmanship.  A  statesman 
was  he  who  realised  that  he  was  the  trustee  of  the  Empire,  and 
that,  though  his  span  was  short  and  his  life  but  few  years  com- 
paratively, and  a  mere  cipher  in  the  history  of  our  country,  yet 
that  he  was  determined  to  place  at  least  something  that  would 
live  on  that  great  superstructure  which  had  been  built  up  by 
generations  of  our  forefathers,  and  which  stood  firm  upon  the 
foundation  laid  by  the  forethought,  the  courage,  and  the 
determination  of  our  ancestors.  It  was  because  Mr.  Balfour 
possessed  those  qualities,  because  throughout  his  whole  public 
career  he  had  shown  single-mindedness  and  been  actuated  by 
patriotism,  and  had  the  highest  and  most  lofty  aims  in  view 
that  he  could  sit  to-day  in  his  proud  position  with  the  conscious- 
ness that  he  was  the  trusted  leader  of  that  party  which  com- 
prehended Conservatives,  Unionists,  and  the  flower  of  the 
Liberal  party.  (Cheers). 

Mr.  Balfour,  who  was  received  with  loud  cheers,  said,  in 
response  :  In  the  speech  which  you  have  just  listened  to  you  have 
heard  me  described,  among  other  eulogistic  epithets,  as  an  ideal 
member  for  the  City  of  London.  (Cheers.)  I  need  hardly  say 
that  I  do  not  quarrel  with  even  the  most  extravagant  eulogies 
which  the  kindness  of  my  friend  on  my  left  may  give  me  on  an 
occasion  like  this,  when  I  have  an  opportunity  of  meeting  so 
many  of  those  to  whom  I  owe  my  present  position  in  the  House 
of  Commons.  I  cannot  help  contrasting  the  present  state  of  the 
party  at  the  moment  at  which  I  am  now  addressing  you  with 
the  state  of  that  party  when  I  last  spoke  in  this  hall  to  an 
audience,  I  have  no  doubt,  largely  identical  with  that  which  I 
am  now  addressing.  At  the  moment  when  my  friend  and  rela- 
tive, Lord  Aldenham,  had  given  me  the  opportunity,  in  the 
darkest  hours  of  the  party  fortunes,  to  represent  this  great 
constituency,  I  had  to  address  them  on  the  present  position  of 
public  affairs.  We  did  not  foresee  at  that  time,  and  we  could 


not  foresee,  any  such  incident  as  that  to  which  your  chairman 
has  referred— the  Mid-Devon  election.  (Cheers.)  We  may  have 
believed,  I  myself  most  firmly  did  believe,  that  many  months 
would  not  elapse  before  those  who  possessed  the  power,  and  still 
possess  the  constitutional  power  in  the  State,  would  have  shown 
to  the  people  of  this  country  of  what  stuff  they  were  made. 
(Laughter.)  It  was  morally  certain  that  the  time  could  not  be 
far  distant  when  there  would  be  some  violent  revulsion  of 
feeling  from  that  which  had  made  itself  manifest  at  the  general 
election  ;  but  we  could  not  then  foresee  the  position  which  we 
now  have  before  us  ;  nor  could  we  in  anticipation  draw  the 
lessons  which  we  now  can  draw  from  what  has  occurred,  and  is 
occurring,  before  our  eyes  throughout  the  country.  I  am  not 
going  to  triumph  over  the  results  of  the  by-election  ;  I  have 
seen  a  great  deal  of  such  triumphing  in  my  time,  sometimes  on 
one  side  and  sometimes  on  the  other.  I  prefer  to  wait  till  the 
final  result  shall  make  itself  felt,  when  the  country  again  returns 
to  those  paths  of  sober  wisdom  which  for  so  many  years  charac- 
terised it.  (Cheers.) 

But  we  may  surely  say,  at  all  events,  of  the  Mid-Devon 
election,  that  it  has  for  us,  and  for  every  constituency  in  the 
United  Kingdom,  lessons  that  ought  not  to  be  forgotten.  The 
plainest,  most  obvious  of  those  lessons  is  the  deep  interest  which 
the  great  controversy  on  fiscal  reform  has  excited  in  all  classes  of 
the  electorate.  (Cheers.)  The  speeches  delivered  in  the  Mid- 
Devon  election  were  mainly  devoted  to  that  great  theme.  It 
was  before  the  constituency  in  every  town,  in  every  village,  and 
every  hamlet  throughout  its  extent.  And  when  we  see  so  great 
a  poll,  so  large  a  number  of  the  electors  recording  their  opinion 
with  that  controversy  full  in  their  minds,  and  with  the  result 
that  we  know — namely,  that  a  seat  which  from  time  immemorial 
had  been  a  Radical  seat  became  a  Unionist  seat,  that  a  seat 
which  had  been  Radical  in  the  great  reaction  after  Mr.  Glad- 
stone's Home  Rule  experiment  in  1895,  which  had  remained 
Radical  in  the  time  of  what  is  called  the  war  fever  in  1900,  in 
1908,  when  that  party  had  been  in  power  with  an  unexampled 
majority  for  only  two  years,  reversed  its  traditional  opinions— 
when  all  these  things  are  obvious,  plain  on  the  surface  of  the 
facts,  the  moral  to  be  drawn  is  one  which  no  man,  however 
blinded,  can  avoid  drawing.  (Cheers.)  I  do  not  dwell  upon  it, 
it  is  so  manifest  that  he  who  runs  may  read,  and  the  observer 
whose  natural  feelings  or  prejudices  may  make  him  most  recal- 
citrant to  drawing  the  obvious  moral  has  only  got  to  survey  the 
facts  of  the  case  to  see  what  that  moral  really  is.  I  would 
rather  dwell  for  a  moment  upon  the  less  manifest  and  obvious 
morals  of  the  Mid- Devon  election.  One  of  these  is  that  if  you 


have  a  good  candidate — and  we  had  an  excellent  candidate — if 
he  works  hard— and  ours  worked  admirably — if  he  has  got  a 
good  organisation,  and  the  organisation  has  been  brought 
thoroughly  up  to  date — in  these  circumstances  there  is  no  seat, 
however  apparently  hopeless,  which  there  is  not  a  prospect  of 
winning.  (Cheers.)  There  is  a  third  moral  I  would  draw,  and 
that  is  that  the  party  wins  when  it  works  together.  (Renewed 
cheers.)  In  the  constituency  of  Mid-Devon,  as  in  other  con- 
stituencies, there  are  different  shades  of  opinion  upon  this  fiscal 
question,  which,  as  I  have  told  you,  was  the  one  before  the 
constituency  at  every  meeting  on  both  sides  throughout  the 
whole  period  of  the  election  ;  but,  though  there  were,  as  might 
be  expected,  different  shades  of  opinion,  every  member  of  the 
Unionist  party,  so  far  as  I  know,  worked,  and  worked  strenu- 
ously and  hard,  to  produce  the  result,  the  ultimate  effects  of 
which  will,  I  think,  be  felt  through  the  whole  course  of  the 
present  Session,  will  modify  every  speech  made  on  the  Govern- 
ment side,  will  strengthen  all  those  who  have  great  interests  to 
defend,  and  will  put  in  their  true  proportion  and  value  all  the 
threats  and  all  the  bluster  of  which  we  have  heard  quite 
sufficient  during  the  last  two  or  three  years.  (Cheers.)  I  hope 
that  that  union  which  has  produced  these  admirable  results  in 
Mid-Devon  will  be  extended  to  every  constituency  in  England, 
Scotland,  and  Ireland  ;  and  if  it  is,  believe  me  when  I  say  that  its 
fruits  elsewhere  will  not  be  less  admirable  than  those  of  which 
we  have  had  practical  experience  during  the  last  few  weeks. 

But  there  is  a  fourth  lesson  to  be  drawn  from  the  Mid-Devon 
election.  There  has  been  a  fourth  factor  in  the  great  success 
which  we  have  there  obtained.  We  owe  our  thanks,  not  merely 
to  our  candidate,  to  our  organization,  to  the  members  of  the 
party  who  have  so  loyally  supported  them  ;  we  owe  our  thanks 
to  the  Prime  Minister  and  the  present  Government,  who  have 
done  so  much  in  the  last  two  years  to  assist  us.  (Laughter.) 
When  I  spoke  in  this  hall  two  years  ago,  I  think,  almost  to  a 
day,  it  was  after  the  present  Government  had  taken  office,  after 
their  success  at  the  polls  was  assured,  but  before  they  had 
•  composed  their  first  King's  Speech,  or  shown,  either  to  Parlia- 
ment or  to  the  country,  what  manner  of  men  they  were.  They 
had  all  the  advantages  which  inevitably  attach  to  the  unknown, 
they  were  the  centre,  they  were  the  object  of  fears  on  our  part, 
they  were  the  object  of  hope  on  the  part  of  vast  bodies  of  the 
electorate.  And  as  our  fears  were  from  the  nature  of  the  case 
indeterminate,  so  the  hopes  of  the  other  side  were  necessarily 
vague.  They  had  told  us,  if  you  remember,  during  the  course 
of  the  general  election  nothing  clear  and  specific  as  to  the  policy 
they  meant  to  pursue.  Everything  was  cloudy,  as  foggy  as  the 


atmosphere  in  which  I  am  now  addressing  you.  (Laughter.) 
It  had  not,  and  could  not  have,  taken  any  clear  and  determinate 
shape;  and,  if  I  rightly  understand  the  policy,  the  very 
judicious  policy,  of  the  present  Prime  Minister  and  his 
colleagues,  they  thought  that  the  less  they  said  of  a  definite 
and  precise  character  about  their  intentions  the  better,  and  the 
larger  licence  they  left  to  their  followers  to  make  very  precise 
and  very  determined  misrepresentations  about  their  political 
opponents  the  more  likely  they  were  to  obtain  a  great  electoral 
success.  The  result,  we  all  know,  was  that  there  was  literally 
nothing  concrete  before  the  country  except  the  lies  placarded 
all  over  the  constituencies  (cheers),  which,  no  doubt,  had  their 
intended  effect.  But  while  it  is,  in  certain  circumstances,  quite 
easy  to  win  an  election  upon  mendacious  placards,  it  is  not  so 
easy  to  retain  the  favour  or  admiration  of  your  countrymen 
when  you  have  either  got  to  live  up  to  your  placards,  which 
they  have  attempted  to  do  with  very  moderate  success  in  South 
Africa,  or  to  devise  some  clear  and  concrete  policy  which  is  to 
satisfy  all  the  vague  aspirations  of  which  they  have  been 
deservedly  or  undeservedly  the  centre.  We  have  had  two  years 
of  them.  The  fog  which  enveloped  their  policy  when  I  last 
spoke  to  you  in  this  hall  has  been  dissipated,  we  know  their 
methods,  and  we  know  their  object.  Their  methods,  indeed, 
have  been  clothed,  naturally  enough,  in  very  gorgeous  language, 
they  have  been  justified  in  very  pompous  phrases,  we  have  been 
told  that  they  are  the  true  apostles  of  social  reform,  we  have 
been  told  that  to  them,  and  to  them  alone,  do  the  great  mass  of 
our  countrymen  look  for  some  legislative  amelioration  of  their 
lot.  But  when  all  these  fine  professions  can  be  analysed  in  the 
light  of  experience  we  see,  what  I  think  has  been  manifest  over 
the  whole  history  of  their  party — namely,  that  professions  of 
social  reform  are  nothing  more  than  the  rather  thin  cloak  under 
which  they  make  an  attack  on  the  classes  or  the  interests 
against  whom  they  happen  to  have  some  political  animosity. 
It  is  not  in  order  to  benefit  the  mass  of  the  community  that 
this  or  that  measure  is  brought  forward ;  the  measure  is 
brought  forward,  not  to  benefit  those  to  whom  it  looks,  but  to 
injure  those  with  whom  it  deals.  If  you  study  their  land 
legislation,  if  you  study  their  proposals  about  local  taxation,  if 
you  study  their  whole  method  of  dealing,  let  us  say,  with  the 
Chinese  labour  question  in  South  Africa,  if  you  study  their 
methods  of  dealing  with  education,  or  their  methods  of  dealing 
with  the  Government  of  Ireland,  the  same  strain  runs  through 
the  whole  web  and  woof  of  their  policy.  It  may  have  no  logical 
or  internal  coherence,  it  may  be  based  upon  no  principles  of 
sound  statesmanship,  but  it  has  always  this  peculiarity,  that 


while  very  little  qualified  to  benefit  anybody,  it  is  always  very 
well  devised  to  injure  somebody.  (Cheers.)  The  people  whom 
it  is  desired  to  injure  are  almost  always  those  particular 
interests  who,  they  chose  to  think,  are  inimical  to  their 
particular  complexion  of  party  politics. 

I  remember  that  one  of  the  points  which  I  touched  upon  two 
years  ago  was  the  obscurity  which  hung  over  the  intentions  of 
the  Labour  party,  who  are  so  important  a  factor  in  the  present 
political  situation,  so  large  an  element  in  that  vague  support 
which  his  Majesty's  Government  obtain  in  Parliament.  At 
that  time  the  Labour  party  had  made  no  declaration  of  policy, 
so  far  as  I  know.  They  were  occasionally  in  collision  electoral ly 
with  the  Government,  they  were  occasionally  in  electoral  collusion 
with  the  Government,  but  they  had  made  no  clear  announce- 
ment as  to  the  view  of  social  reconstruction  which  they  went 
into  Parliament  in  order  to  further.  If  I  rightly  understand 
what  has  happened  in  the  last  36  hours  that  obscurity  is  now 
wholly  dissipated.  We  know  exactly  where  we  are  ;  and  the 
Labour  party,  or  the  large  majority  of  the  Labour  party,  have 
now  definitely,  in  their  own  language,  hoisted  the  red  flag. 
They  have  announced  themselves  as  advocates  of  a  scheme  of 
social  reconstruction  which  has  found  advocates,  indeed,  in 
many  countries,  but  which  has  been  carried  out  in  none  (cheers), 
which  would  carry  with  it,  not  merely  the  ruin  of  the  great 
commercial  centre  in  which  I  am  speaking,  which  would  not 
only  bring  to  an  end  the  great  enterprises  of  which  your  chair- 
man has  to-day  spoken  in  terms  of  justifiable  pride,  which 
would  not  only  destroy  our  commercial,  financial,  and  manu- 
facturing position  among  the  nations  of  the  world,  but  which 
would,  in  my  opinion,  be  the  greatest  calamity  that  has  ever 
happened  in  the  world,  not  to  the  rich,  but  to  the  poor. 
(Cheers.)  We  have  difficulties,  inevitable  difficulties,  before  us  in 
connexion  with  these  problems  of  social  reform,  because  most  of 
us  are  agreed  I  think  in  this  room — at  all  events  I  quite  clearly 
and  definitely  hold  the  opinions  for  myself — that  social  reform 
is  part  of  the  programme  of  the  party  to  which  we  belong 
(cheers),  and  that  you  cannot  lay  down  those  clear-cut  and 
definite  formulae  dear  to  the  hearts  of  our  grandfathers,  by 
which  they  limited,  in  this  direction  or  in  that  direction,  the 
activity  of  the  State.  I  do  not  believe  in  these  formulae,  I 
regard  them  as  unscientific,  I  regard  them  as  impossible  to 
carry  out  in  these  days,  mischievous  if  you  could  carry  them 
out.  I  do  not  deny,  I  never  have  denied,  that  they  had  great 
conveniences  from  the  legislator's  point  of  view,  and  I  do  not 
deny  that  their  practical  abandonment  by  the  great  body  of 
public  opinion  in  this  country,  to  whatever  party  it  belongs,  is 


going  to  be  a  source  of  difficulty,  and  of  confusion  even,  in  the 
politics  of  the  future.  But  this,  I  think,  is  clear,  this,  I  think, 
is  definite,  this,  I  think,  is  a  doctrine  to  which  every  man,  at 
any  rate  every  man  who  belongs  to  our  party,  may  give  his 
unqualified  absolute  adhesion  ;  it  is  that  the  greatness  of  a 
country,  its  industrial  position,  its  wealth,  its  productive  power, 
its  inventive  power,  will  depend  in  the  future,  do  depend  in  the 
present,  have  depended  in  the  past,  upon  private  initiative. 
(Cheers.)  You  will  never  get  a  bureaucracy,  or  a  Government, 
or  a  Parliament,  however  you  constitute  it  or  reconstitute  it, 
you  will  never  get  trade  unions,  you  will  never  get  labour 
representatives,  you  will  never  get  any  collection  of  men  to  do 
that  for  the  promotion  of  productive  enterprise  which  is  now 
done  by  individual  initiative.  And  you  will  never  have 
individual  initiative  carried  to  its  most  effective  limits  unless 
you  give  that  security  to  the  results  of  enterprise  which  it  used 
to  be  thought  it  was  the  primary  duty  of  a  Government  to 
give  (cheers),  but  which  it  now  seems  it  is  one  of  the  subsidiary 
duties  of  a  Government  to  destroy.  What  folly  from  this  point 
of  view  have  the  present  holders  of  power  been  guilty  of ! 
They  turn  from  one  interest,  from  one  section  of  their 
supporters,  to  another,  and  they  try  to  throw  to  each  in  turn 
some  agreeable  sop  which  may  ensure  their  allegiance  and  their 
loyalty,  little  reflecting  how  much  injury  is  done  to  the  com- 
munity as  a  whole  by  that  which  pleases  some  particular  and 
irresponsible  section.  I  will  not  go  into  such  questions,  it  is 
not  the  occasion.  I  spoke  in  this  constituency  before  on 
education  ;  I  am  not  going  into  education,  although  I  could 
illustrate  from  that  theme  to  any  extent  this  passion  for 
injuring  opponents  and  this  total  indifference  to  the  great 
cause  of  education — which  is  nominally,  I  suppose,  the  motive 
of  all  our  educational  proposals.  I  will  not  touch  on  that,  but 
I  will  take  one  other  illustration  of  the  broad  proposition  I 
was  advancing. 

Here  is  a  Government  who  bring  in  a  Bill  for  Scotland 
touching  on  the  rating  of  ground  values,  as  they  are  called  in 
Scotland.  It  is  a  Scottish  Bill,  and  therefore  does  not  obviously 
and  directly  affect  English  or  Irish  interests.  It  is  a  Bill  which 
imposes  no  tax,  and  therefore  immediately  and  obviously 
frightens  no  one,  or  at  all  events  anybody  may  say  it  will  have 
no  consequences  except  the  cost  and  labour  of  framing  a  new 
system.  I  do  not  believe  the  Bill  will  ever  pass  ;  but  what  has 
it  done  by  merely  being  brought  in,  and  by  being  defended  by 
members  of  the  Government  on  principles  which  destroy  the 
whole  sanctity  of  contract  ?  What  has  happened,  of  course,  is 
what  you  would  expect  to  happen,  that  without  benefiting  a 


single  soul,  without  putting  a  penny  in  the  pocket  of  a  single 
ratepayer,  without  the  smallest  advantage,  public  or  private,  to 
any  citizen  or  subject  of  his  Majesty,  they  have  lowered  the 
whole  value  of  one  of  the  safest  and  most  desirable  securities 
that  at  present  exists— securities  of  a  kind  in  which  the  widow 
and  the  orphan,  the  insurance  office,  the  benefit  society,  all  the 
societies  which  deal  with  thrift  and  promote  thrift,  were  in  the 
habit  of  investing.  All  those  have  been  touched,  and  the  secu- 
rity of  all  diminished,  not  by  legislation,  but  by  an  attempt  at 
legislation  foredoomed  to  failure,  foolish  in  its  principles,  foolish 
in  its  claims,  indefensible  on  any  known  theory  of  property, 
and  which,  therefore,  I  cannot  conceive  will  ever  receive  the 
sanction  of  the  Legislature,  but  which,  even  if  it  never  passed, 
has  been  sufficient  to  shatter  credit  in  one  of  its  departments. 
Well,  that  is  only  one  instance,  but  it  is  a  specimen  of  what  a 
Government  will  do  under  no  responsible  leadership,  following 
no  very  well-defined  principles,  and  depending  for  its  support 
upon  a  left  wing  which  shades  insensibly  but  rapidly  into  that 
body  of  socialistic  opinions  who  have  just  hauled  up  their  flag 
and  mean  to  fight  under  the  piratical  colours  of  general  spolia- 
tion. Do  not  suppose  that  considerations  like  these  were  absent 
from  the  minds  of  those  who  voted  in  the  Mid-Devon  election. 
Depend  upon  it  the  present  Government  have,  in  their  short 
tenure  of  office,  already  succeeded  in  spreading  throughout  a 
large  body  of  opinion,  partly  neutral  opinion,  partly  non-neutral 
and  favourable  to  themselves,  a  feeling  of  doubt,  of  mistrust,  of 
scepticism  as  to  the  character  of  their  policy,  which  will  silently 
affect  every  election  in  the  kingdom. 

I  myself  believe  that  there  is  little  room  now  in  the  political 
constitution  of  this  country  for  the  old-fashioned  Liberal  who, 
in  his  time,  has  done  great  service  for  the  State.  The  Liberals 
were  a  leading  power  in  an  important  period  of  transition  ;  but 
the  course  of  events  has  practically  destroyed  all  the  differences, 
never  perhaps  very  great,  which  separated  them  from  the  party 
to  which  we  belong,  and  we  are  now  tending  towards  a  different 
arrangement  of  political  forces,  a  rearrangement  of  political 
forces  in  which  the  Unionist  party  must  indeed  be  the  leading 
element  and  member  upon  one  side,  though  not  the  only  one  ; 
and  on  which  our  Socialistic  friends,  who  have  just  hauled  up 
their  flag,  will  doubtless  be  the  militant  force  upon  the  other. 
Between  the  two  ideals  of  social  construction  which  those  two 
bodies  of  opinion  represent  is  to  be  the  great  fight  in  the 
future.  Both  are  agreed,  as  I  understand  it,  that  it  is  the  duty 
of  Parliament  to  do  its  best'  for  every  class  in  the  community, 
and  that  the  theories  of  unrestricted  competition  which  were 
once  the  favourite  doctrine  of  the  Radical  party,  though  they 


never  were  the  favourite  doctrine  of  the  Tory  party — both  sides 
admit  that  this  doctrine  of  the  unrestricted  play  of  free  com- 
petition in  every  sphere  of  social  life  is  one  which  you  cannot 
maintain  untouched.  But  though  there  is  an  agreement  to  that 
extent  between  these  two  parties  of  the  future,  there  remains  that 
profound  and  impassable  gulf  of  which  I  spoke  a  few  moments 
ago,  that  gulf  which  divides  those  who  on  the  one  side  think 
that  the  main  object  of  the  attention  of  the  social  reformer 
should  not  be  so  much  the  production  of  wealth  as  its  distri- 
bution, who  think,  therefore,  that  the  State  in  its  corporate 
capacity  must  take  over  all  the  means  of  production  and  all  the 
methods  of  distribution  ;  and  those  on  the  other  side  of  the  gulf 
who  agree  with  us  in  this  room  that,  if  you  want  to  consider 
the  material  welfare  of  the  community,  your  gaze  should  be 
fixed  primarily  and  essentially  upon  the  production  of  wealth, 
that  unless  you  have  something  to  divide  the  question  of 
distribution  falls  into  the  background,  and  that  the  production 
of  the  wealth  itself,  according  to  all  that  experience  and  all 
that  reason  teaches  us,  is  a  production  which  never  can  be 
carried  to  its  highest  perfection  unless  you  bring  to  the  service 
of  humanity  all  that  science  can  teach,  all  that  enterprise  can 
give,  all  that  can  be  done,  and  done  only,  by  people  who  are 
ready  to  take  risks,  who  are  ready  to  suffer  if  they  fail,  and  who 
must  be  allowed  to  profit  if  they  succeed.  (Cheers.)  That  is  a 
theory  which,  as  I  think,  must  lie  at  the  basis  for  all  time  of 
every  great  successful  and  productive  community.  Be  your 
social  legislation  what  it  may,  turn  your  attention  as  closely  as 
you  like  to  the  great  and  beneficent  task  of  ameliorating  the 
lot  of  the  less  fortunate  members  of  the  community,  at  the  basis 
of  it  all,  and  for  the  benefit  of  all,  there  must  be  that  security 
of  property,  that  recognition  of  the  value  of  independent  effort, 
on  which  all  successful  societies  have  hitherto  been  based,  and 
on  which,  as  long  as  human  nature  remains  what  it  is,  successful 
societies  must  be  based  in  the  future.  (Loud  cheers.) 

Sir  F.  Banbury  also  responded  to  the  toast. 

The  toast  of  "The  Chairman"  was  proposed  by  Mr.  Balfour, 
and  Sir  J.  Dimsdale  briefly  responded. 



On  January  23,  1908,  Mr.  Balfour  and  Sir  F.  Banbury, 
the  members  for  the  City  of  London,  were  entertained  by 
the  City  Conservative  Association  at  luncheon  in  Merchant 


Taylors'  Hall.  Sir  Joseph  Dimsdale  presided,  and  proposed 
the  health  of  the  guests. 

Mr.  Balfour,  in  reply,  dwelt  on  the  lessons  of  the  Mid- 
Devon  election.  The  plainest  and  most  obvious  of  these 
lessons  was  the  deep  interest  which  the  great  controversy 
of  fiscal  reform  had  excited  in  all  classes  of  the  electorate. 
The  measures  of  the  Government  were  based  on  no  broad 
principle  of  sound  statesmanship,  and  while  little  qualified 
to  benefit  anybody,  they  were  very  well  qualified  to  injure 

The  members  of  the  Labour  Party  had  now  definitely 
hoisted  their  red  flag,  and  announced  their  advocacy  of  a 
scheme  of  social  reconstruction  which,  if  it  were  realised, 
would  be  the  greatest  calamity  that  had  ever  happened, 
not  to  the  rich,  but  to  the  poor. 

After  further  criticising  the  policy  of  Ministers,  Mr. 
Balfour  contended  that  there  was  now  little  room  in  our 
political  constitution  for  the  old-fashioned  Liberals.  We 
were  tending  towards  a  rearrangement  of  political  forces, 
in  which  the  Unionist  party  must  be  the  leading  element 
on  the  one  side,  and  the  Socialists  would  doubtless  be  the 
militant  force  on  the  other. 


The  worst  of  the  application  of  the  long-run  system  to  heroic 
plays  is  that,  instead  of  killing  the  actor,  it  drives  him  to  limit 
nimself  to  such  effects  as  he  can  repeat  to  infinity  without  com- 
mitting suicide.  The  opposite  system,  in  its  extreme  form  of 
the  old  stock  company  playing  two  or  three  different  pieces 
every  night,  led  to  the  same  evasion  in  a  more  offensive  form. 
The  recent  correspondence  in  the  Morning  Post  on  the  stage  as  a 
Profession,  to  which  I  have  myself  luminously  contributed,  has 
produced  the  usual  fallacious  eulogies  of  the  old  stock  company 
as  a  school  of  acting.  You  can  no  more  prevent  contributors 
to  public  correspondences  falling  into  this  twenty-times-exploded 
error  than  from  declaring  that  duelling  was  a  school  of  good 
manners,  that  the  lash  suppressed  garrotting,  or  any  other  of 
the  gratuitous  ignorances  of  the  amateur  sociologist.  The  truth 
is,  it  is  just  as  impossible  for  a  human  being  to  study  and  per- 
form a  new  part  of  any  magnitude  every  day  as  to  play  Hamlet 
for  a  hundred  consecutive  nights.  Nevertheless,  if  an  actor  is 


required  to  do  these  things,  he  will  find  some  way  "out  of  the 
difficulty  without  refusing.  The  stock  actor  solved  the  problem 
by  adopting  a  "line"  :  for  example,  if  his  "  line"  was  old  age, 
he  acquired  a  trick  of  doddering  and  speaking  in  a  cracked 
voice  ;  if  juvenility,  he  swaggered  and  effervesced.  With  these 
accomplishments,  eked  out  by  a  few  rules  of  thumb  as  to  wigs 
and  face-painting,  one  deplorable  step  dance,  and  one  still  more 
deplorable  "  combat,"  he  "  swallowed  "  every  part  given  to  him 
in  a  couple  of  hours,  and  regurgitated  it  in  the  evening  over  the 
footlights,  always  in  the  same  manner,  however  finely  the 
dramatist  might  have  individualised  it.  His  infamous  incom- 
petence at  last  swept  him  from  the  reputable  theatres  into  the 
barns  and  booths  ;  and  it  was  then  that  he  became  canonised,  in 
the  imagination  of  a  posterity  that  had  never  suffered  from  him, 
as  the  incarnation  of  the  one  quality  in  which  he  was  quite 
damnably  deficient ;  to  wit,  versatility.  His  great  contribution 
to  dramatic  art  was  the  knack  of  earning  a  living  for  fifty  years 
on  the  stage  without  ever  really  acting,  or  either  knowing  or 
caring  for  the  difference  between  the  "  Comedy  of  Errors  "  and 
"  Box  and  Cox." 

A  moment's  consideration  will  show  that  the  results  of  the 
long-run  system  at  its  worst  are  more  bearable  than  the  horrors 
of  the  past.  Also,  that  even  in  point  of  giving  the  actor  some 
chance  of  varying  his  work,  the  long-run  system  is  superior, 
since  the  modern  actor  may  at  all  events  exhaust  the  possibilities 
of  his  part  before  it  exhausts  him,  whereas  the  stock  actor, 
having  barely  time  to  apply  his  bag  of  tricks  to  his  daily  task, 
never  varies  his  treatment  by  a  hair's-breadth  from  one  half- 
century  to  another.  The  best  system,  of  course,  lies  between 
these  extremes.  Take  the  case  of  the  great  Italian  actors  who 
have  visited  us,  and  whose  acting  is  of  an  excellence  apparently 
quite  beyond  the  reach  of  our  best  English  performers.  We 
find  them  extremely  chary  of  playing  every  night.  They  have 
a  repertory  containing  plays  which  count  as  resting  places  for 
them.  For  example,  Duse  relieves  Magda  with  Mirandolina, 
just  as  our  own  Shakesperean  star  actors  used  to  relieve  Richard 
the  Third  and  Othello  with  Charles  Surface  and  Son  Felix.  But 
even  with  this  mitigation  no  actor  can  possibly  play  leading 
parts  of  the  first  order  six  nights  a  week  all  the  year  round 
unless  he  underplays  them,  or  routines  them  mechanically  in 
the  old  stock  manner,  or  faces  a  terrible  risk  of  disablement  by 
paralysis,  or,  finally  resorts  to  alcohol  or  morphia,  with  the 
usual  penalties.  What  we  want  in  order  to  get  the  best  work 
is  a  repertory  theatre  with  alternative  casts.  If,  for  instance, 
we  could  have  "  Hamlet " 
Irving  and  Miss  Ellen 

; "  running  at  the  Lyceum  with  Sir  Henry 
Terry  on  Thursdays  and  Saturdays,  Mr. 


Forbes  Robertson  and  Mrs.  Patrick  Campbell  on  Wednesdays 
and  Fridays,  and  the  other  two  days  devoted  to  comedies  in 
which  all  four  could  occasionally  appear,  with  such  comedians  as 
Mr.  Charles  Wyndham,  Mr.  Weedon  Grossmith,  Mr.  Bourchier, 
Mr.  Cyril  Maude,  and  Mr.  Hawtrey,  then  we  should  have  a 
theatre  which  we  could  invite  serious  people  to  attend  without 
positively  insulting  them.  I  am  aware  that  the  precise  com- 
bination which  I  have  named  is  not  altogether  a  probable  one  at 
present ;  but  there  is  no  reason  why  we  should  not  at  least  turn 
our  faces  in  that  direction.  The  actor-manager  system,  which 
has  hitherto  meant  the  star  system  carried  to  its  utmost  possible 
extreme,  has  made  the  theatre  so  insufferable  that,  now  that  its 
monopoly  has  been  broken  up  by  the  rise  of  the  suburban 
theatres,  there  is  a  distinct  weakening  of  the  jealous  and  shame- 
less individualism  of  the  last  twenty  years,  and  a  movement 
towards  combination  and  co-operation. 

(GEORGE  BERNARD  SHAW — Dramatic  Opinions  and  Essays.) 


The  long-run  system  undoubtedly  tends  to  stultify  the 
art  of  acting.  It  is  wrong  to  suppose,  however,  that  the 
old  stock  company  had  not  even  a  more  deleterious  effect 
on  that  art.  The  remedy  for  the  present  unsatisfactory 
situation  lies  in  the  establishment  of  a  repertory  theatre 
with  alternate  casts  of  our  most  talented  artistes.  Although 
the  adoption  of  this  remedy  is  for  the  moment  highly 
improbable,  the  invasion'  of  the  monopoly  of  the  actor- 
manager  system  by  the  rise  of  the  suburban  theatres  points 
to  greater  combination  and  co-operation  in  the  future. 




EXERCISE  No.  1. 



Governor  Sir  Wm.  MacGregor  to  Mr.  Lyttelton. 

(Received  December  2,  1905.) 

Government  House,  St.  John's,  November  18,  1905. 
SIR, — With  reference  to  your  despatch  of  16th  October,  I  have 
the  honour  to  inform  you  that  my  Ministers  agree  in  principle 
to  the  institution  of  the  contemplated  Joint  Commission. 

I  have,  etc.,        WM.  MACGREGOR. 

No.  2.  CANADA. 

Governor-General  Earl  Grey  to  Mr.  Lyttelton. 
(Received  7.50  p.m.,  December  5,  1905.) 


Referring  to  your  telegram  of  29th  November,  Responsible 
Ministers  have  no  objection  to  Colonial  Conference  being  held 
in  1907  instead  of  1906. 

No.  3.  NATAL. 

Governor  Sir  H.  E.  M'Callum  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 
(Received  11  a.m.,  December  22,  1905.) 


December  22.  No.  1.  Referring  to  your  telegram,  29th 
November,  Ministers  are  agreeable  to  postponement  of  next 
Colonial  Conference  until  1907. 


No.  4.  CAPE  COLONY. 

Governor  Sir  W.  F.  Hely-Hutchinson  to  Mr.  Lyttelton. 

(Received  December  23,  1905.) 

Government  House,  Cape  Town,  December  6,  1905. 
SIR, — I  have  the  honour  to  transmit  to  you  the  document 
specified  in  the  annexed  schedule. 

I  have,  etc.,        WALTER  HELY-HDTCHINSON. 


Description  of  Document. 

6th  December,  1905 

Minute  from.  Ministers. 

Date  of  meeting  of  the  next 


Enclosure  in  No.  4. 
(Minute.)  Ministers  to  Governor. 

Prime  Minister's  Office,  Cape  Town,  December  6,  1905. 
In  acknowledging  the  receipt  of  His  Excellency  the  Governor's 
minute  of  the  30th  ultimo,  transmitting  a  copy  of  a  telegram 
from  the  Right  Honourable  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the 
Colonies,  dated  the  29th  idem,  relative  to  the  date  of  meeting  of 
the  next  Colonial  Conference,  Ministers  have  the  honour  to 
state  in  reply  that  they  are  desirous  that  the  Conference  should 
meet  in  the  year  1906,  due  consideration  being  given,  however, 
to  the  wishes  and  necessities  of  the  various  Colonial  Govern- 
ments in  regard  to  the  actual  date  of  assembly. 

T.  W.  SMARTT. 

No.  5.  AUSTRALIA. 

Governor- General  Lord  Northcote  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 
(Received  7.50  a.m.,  December  23,  1905.) 


Referring  to  your  telegram  of  29th  November,  Colonial 
Conference,  Government  have  no  objection  to  postponement, 


Governor  Sir  Wm.  MacGregor  to  Mr.  Lyttelton. 

(Received  December  28,  1905.) 

Government  House,  St.  John's,  December  8,  1905. 
SIR, — With  reference  to  your  telegram  of  the  29th  November, 
I  have  the  honour  to  inform  you  that  my  Ministers  are  of 


opinion  that  it  would  be  advisable  to  postpone  the  meeting  of 
the  Colonial  Conference  till  1907. 

I  have,  etc.,        WM.  MAGGREGOR. 

No.  7.  NEW  ZEALAND. 

Governor  Lord  Plunket  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 

(Received  7.40  a.m.,  January  26,  1906.) 


Following  telegram  received  from  Premier  : 

Begins :  Government  of  New  Zealand  see  no  objection  to 
postponement  of  Imperial  Conference  of  Prime  Ministers 
until  1907,  but  would  prefer  that  it  should  be  held  at  an 
early  date  in  that  year. 

No.  8. 
The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  the  Governors  of  Self -Governing  Colonies. 

(Sent  February  19,  1906.) 

Referring  to  my  predecessor's  telegram  of  20th  November, 
and  to  your  reply,  His  Majesty's  Government  propose  that 
Colonial  Conference  should  meet  early  in  March,  1907,  as  it 
seems  impossible  to  arrange  a  meeting  conveniently  this  year. 
I  shall  be  glad  to  learn  that  this  date  will  suit  your  Prime 

Despatch  follows  by  mail. 

No.  9. 

The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  the  Governors  of  Self -Governing  Colonies. 
MY  LORD,  Downing  Street,  February  22,  1906. 

SIR, — My  predecessor,  in  his  telegram  of  the  29th  November 
last,  suggested  that  it  might  be  advisable  to  postpone  the 
Colonial  Conference  until  the  year  1907,  since  it  was  not  possible 
for  the  Prime  Ministers  of  the  Australian  Commonwealth  and  of 
New  Zealand  to  attend  a  Conference  in  1906  if  it  was  held  later 
than  in  the  spring,  and  it  did  not  then  appear  to  be  practicable 
to  make  preparation  for  a  Conference  by  that  time. 

2.  I  have  now  the  honour  to  enclose,  for  the  information  of 
your  Ministers,  copies  of  the  replies  received  from  the  several 
Colonies,  from  which  it  will  be  seen  that  while  the  Cape 
Ministers  desired  that  the  Conference  should  meet  this  year, 


the  other  Governments  agreed  to  postponement  until  next  year, 
and  the  Government  of  New  Zealand  expressed  a  hope  that  the 
meeting  might  take  place  early  in  the  year. 

3.  I  accordingly  informed  you,  in  my  telegram  of  the  19th 
instant,   that   His   Majesty's   Government   proposed    that   the 
Conference  should  meet  early  in  March,  1907,  and  added  that  I 
should  be  glad  to  learn  if  that  date  would  be  convenient  to  your 
Prime  Minister. 

4.  My  predecessor  communicated  to  your  Government,  in  his 
despatch  of  7th  December  last,  the  Parliamentary  Paper  con- 
taining the  correspondence  with  various  Colonial  Governments 
arising  out  of  his  despatch  of  20th  April,  which  dealt  with 
certain  proposals  respecting  the  organization  of  future  Colonial 
Conferences.     I  do  not  feel   myself  called  upon  to  adopt   the 
recommendation  of  those   proposals  ;    but  in  view  of  the  ex- 
pressions of  opinion  received  from  the  Colonies  I  think  that  it 
will  be  desirable  that  the  scheme  should  be  freely  discussed 
when  the  Conference  meets. 

5.  It  will  much  facilitate  the  proceedings  of  the  Conference 
by  enabling  full  preparation  to  be  made  beforehand,  if  your 
Government  will  communicate  to  me,  so  as  to  reach  me  not 
later  than  the  1st  of  September  next,  a  statement  as  to  any 
subjects  which  they  desire  to  be  discussed,  and  as  to  any  resolu- 
tions which  they  wish  to  submit  to  the  Conference. 

6.  I  will  address  you  in  due  course  as  regards  the  subjects 
which  His  Majesty's  Government  may  wish  to  bring  before  the 

7.  His  Majesty's  Government  feel  every  confidence  that  the 
next  Conference,  like  those  which  have  preceded  it,  will  help  to 
increase  the  good  understanding  and  cordial  feeling  which  exist 
between  the  Governments  of  the  various  self-governing  com- 
munities of  the  Empire. 

I  have,  etc.,  ELGIN. 

No.  10.  NEW  ZEALAND. 

Governor  Lord  Plunket  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 

(Received  7.50  a.m.,  April  27,  1906.) 


Colonial  Conference.  My  Responsible  Advisers,  whilst  aware 
that  Governments  of  self-governing  Colonies  will  be  invited  to 
submit  proposals  for  consideration  at  Conference,  would  be  glad 
to  know  whether  proposals  concerning  fiscal  matters  and  prefer- 
ential trade  throughout  Empire  will  be  admitted. 


No.  11.  NEW  ZEALAND. 

The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  Governor  Lord  Plunket. 

(Sent  May  12,  1906.) 


Referring  to  your  telegram  of  27th  April,  any  proposals 
regarding  fiscal  matters  which  your  Prime  Minister  may  wish 
to  bring  forward  will  be  submitted  to  Conference,  in  accordance 
with  my  despatch  of  22nd  February. 

No.  12. 

The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  the  Governors  of  Self -Governing  Colonies. 

(Sent  2.45  p.m.,  May  12,  1906.) 


Referring  to  my  despatch  22nd  February,  I  have  now  ascer- 
tained by  communication  with  all  the  Colonies  concerned  that 
the  date  for  Colonial  Conference  most  acceptable  to  all  Premiers, 
having  regard  to  the  varying  conditions  involved  in  the  meeting 
of  their  Legislatures,  will  be  April  15th  next,  in  place  of  the 
previous  suggestion  of  a  date  early  in  March.  I  have,  there- 
fore, much  pleasure,  on  behalf  of  His  Majesty's  Government,  in 
inviting  your  Prime  Minister  to  attend  the  Conference  on  15th 

EXERCISE  No.    2. 


No.  1.  Board  of  Trade  to  Foreign  Office. 

Keceived  July  7. 

Board  of  Trade,  July  6,  1906. 

SIR, — I  am  directed  by  the  Board  of  Trade  to  transmit  to 
you,  for  the  information  of  Sir  E.  Grey,  the  accompanying  copy 
of  a  letter  from  the  Colonial  Office,  forwarding  a  despatch  from 
the  Governor-General  of  Australia,  suggesting  that  His  Majesty's 
Government  should  use  their  influence  to  secure  a  reduction  in 
the  charges  imposed  by  the  Suez  Canal  authorities. 

The  Board  have  informed  the  Colonial  Office  that  the  transit 
dues  of  the  Suez  Canal  Company  were  reduced  on  the  1st 
January  last  to  the  extent  of  75  centimes,  but  I  am  to  suggest, 


for  Sir  E.  Grey's  consideration,  that  the  British  Directors  of  the 
Company  may  be  asked  for  their  observations  on  this  com- 

I  am,  etc.        (Signed)       WALTER  J.  HOWELL. 

Inclosure  1  in  No.  1. 
Colonial  Office  to  Board  of  Trade. 

Downing  Street,  June  27,  1906. 

SIR, — I  am  directed  by  the  Earl  of  Elgin  to  transmit,  for  any 
observations  the  Board  of  Trade  may  have  to  offer  thereon,  the 
accompanying  copy  of  a  despatch  from  the  Governor-General  of 
Australia,  suggesting,  at  the  instance  of  his  Ministers,  that  His 
Majesty's  Government  should,  in  the  interests  of  inter- Imperial 
trade  and  immigration,  use  their  influence  to  secure  a  reduction 
in  the  charges  imposed  by  the  Suez  Canal  authorities. 

I  am,  etc.         (Signed)        H.  BERTRAM  Cox. 

Inelosure  2  in  No.  1. 
Governor-General  Lord  Northcote  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 

Sydney,  May  15,  1906. 

My  LORD, — I  have  the  honour  to  inform  your  Lordship  that 
my  Ministers  have  recently  been  making  inquiries  with  a  view 
to  considering  measures  for  the  improvement  of  the  present 
means  of  transport  between  Australia  and  Great  Britain,  for 
the  purpose  of  the  encouragement  of  trade  and  the  carriage  of 
immigrants  at  cheap  lutes. 

2.  In   the   course  of   inquiries    the   important   question   has 
arisen  as  to  the  route  followed  by  steam-ships  trading  between 
England  and  Australia,  the  voyage  via  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope 
involving  a  delay  of  several  days  as  compared  with  that  via  the 
Red  Sea  and  the  Suez  Canal. 

3.  It  has  been  learned  that  many  shipowners  are  deterred 
from  taking  the  shorter  route  by  reason  of  the  very  heavy 
charges  which  are  imposed  by  the  Suez  Canal  authorities.    Ship- 
owners are  compelled  either  to  increase  their  rates  for  passage 
and  freight  by  adding  the  Canal  dues,  or  else  to  take  the  longer 
but    less    expensive    course    round    South    Africa.      As   every 
shortening  of  the  voyage  between  Great  Britain  and  Australia 
is  valuable  to  shippers  of  perishable  and  other  products,  especi- 
ally in  certain  seasons,  my  Ministers  are  anxious  that  no  nreans 
shall  be  left  untried  to  induce  the  ships  to  use  the  Suez  Canal. 

4.  Seeing  that  the  Canal  dues  enable  shareholders  to  receive 
a  dividend  of  28  per  cent.,  my  Ministers  are  of  opinion  that  the 
time  has  arrived  for  the  reconsideration  of  the  existing  rates, 
and   possibly   for  a  substantial   reduction   therein,   and    they 


suggest  that,  on  behalf  of  Australia,  as  well  as  of  all  other 
British  possessions  lying  to  the  east  of  Egypt,  the  influence  of 
the  British  Government  might  be  employed  in  procuring  con- 
cessions which  would  have  an  early  and  material  effect  on 
inter- Empire  trade,  as  well  as  upon  the  volume  of  traffic  which 
will  pass  through  the  Canal. 

I  have,  etc.        (Signed)        NORTHCOTE. 

No.  2.     British  Suez  Canal  Directors  to  Sir  Edward  Grey. 
(Received  September  4. ) 

Paris,  August  31,  1906. 

SIR,— In  conformity  with  the  instructions  contained  in  your 
despatch  of  the  13th  ultimo,  we  have  the  honour  to  submit,  for  the 
information  of  the  Secretary  of  State,  the  following  observations. 

We  have  perused  the  inclosures  which  are  forwarded  in  the 
despatch,  and  have  given  special  attention  to  the  letter  in  which 
the  Governor-General  of  Australia  invokes  the  employment  of 
the  influence  of  the  British  Government  to  procure  concessions 
in  the  way  of  a  reduction  of  the  existing  rates  of  dues  on  vessels 
passing  through  the  Suez  Canal. 

Lord  Northcote's  Ministers  adduce  four  reasons  in  support  of 
a  reduction  of  the  Tariff. 

1.  That  shipowners  are  deterred   from   taking   the  shorter 
route  on  account  of  the  very  heavy  charges. 

2.  That  the  dividends  now  paid  amount  to  28  per  cent. 

3.  That  the  inter- Empire  trade  would  be  beneficially  affected. 

4.  That  the  volume  of  traffic  through  the  Canal  would  be 

Although  these  points  have  been  discussed  in  considerable 
detail  in  previous  correspondence  between  the  Foreign  Office 
and  ourselves,  we  will  again  review  the  arguments  briefly. 

1.  With  regard  to  the  first  statement,  the  statistics  of  navi- 
gation by  the  Canal  route  present  incontrovertible  evidence 
that  during  the  thirty  years  in  which  it  has  been  in  existence 
the  number  of  ships  which  have  made  use  of  it  has  greatly  and, 
with  the  exception  of  minor  fluctuations,  steadily  increased,  viz., 
from  2,000,000  tons  net  in  1876  to  13,000,000  tons  in  1905. 

Although  it  might  reasonably  be  supposed  that  this  six-fold 
increase  was  in  the  main  due  to  the  reductions  which  have  been 
made  in  the  tonnage  rates,  little  or  no  relation  in  the  way  of 
cause  and  effect  can  be  traced  between  them,  while  the  increased 
traffic  appears  to  be  proportionate  to  the  growth  of  the  mari- 
time commerce  of  the  world  in  a  very  exact  measure. 

Paradoxical  as  it  may  appear,  we  are  assured  by  many  large 
shipowners  that,  although  reductions  in  the  Tariff  are  welcomed 


by  them,  these  reductions  have  practically  no  effect  in  increasing 
the  Canal  traffic,  or  in  diverting  from  the  Cape  to  the  Canal 
route  any  material  amount  of  tonnage.  Far  more  importance 
is  attached  by  them  to  the  widening  and  deepening  of  the  Canal 
than  to  any  reduction  in  the  charges  for  its  use. 

It  cannot  therefore  be  maintained  that  the  charges  are 
deterrent,  as  alleged,  but  we  have  always  supported  their 
reduction,  and  we  would  point  out  that  the  dues,  which  were 
originally,  in  1869,  fixed  at  10  fr.  per  ton,  and  raised  to  13  fr. 
per  ton  in  1874,  have  by  successive  stages  been  reduced  to  7  fr. 
75  c.  per  ton,  at  which  rate  they  now  stand.  The  last  reduction 
of  75  centimes  per  ton  was  conceded  as  recently  as  from  the 
1st  January  of  this  year,  and  followed  on  a  reduction  of  50 
centimes  per  ton  made  on  the  1st  January,  1903,  amounting  to 
a  total  reduction  by  14  per  cent,  of  the  Tariff  during  the  last 
three  years. 

2.  While  the  present  dividend  of  28  per  cent,  on  the  500-fr. 
share  is  an  undoubted  sign  of  the  great  prosperity  of  the 
enterprise,  we  cannot  regard  it  as  a  proof  that  its  profits  are 
exorbitant.  The  arrangement  which  admits  of  this  result  was 
agreed  to  between  the  shipowners  and  M.  Ferdinand  de  Lesseps 
in  1882,  neither  party  at  the  time  anticipating  its  realization. 
It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  from  1869  to  1870  the  share- 
holders only  received  a  yearly  dividend  of  5  per  cent.  ;  from 
July  1871  to  July  1874  the  dividend  was  passed  and  replaced 
by  a  certificate  for  85  fr.,  which  was  subsequently  paid.  From 
that  date  to  July  last  the  average  of  the  dividends  has  been 
16  per  cent.,  but  from  the  formation  of  the  Company  to  the 
present  date  it  has  only  amounted,  in  round  figures,  to  12^  per 
cent.,  and,  owing  to  the  large  increase  in  the  market  value  of 
the  shares,  the  return  to  the  purchasers  for  some  years  has 
ranged  between  3  and  4  per  cent. 

It  is  manifest  that  the  body  of  shareholders  is  interested  in 
maintaining  the  growth  of  the  dividend,  and  that  their  voting, 
power  at  a  general  meeting  would  most  probably  be  exercised 
in  favour  of  further  increase  (with  the  exception,  of  course,  of 
the  British  vote,  which  very  inadequately  represents  the  pro- 
portion of  shares  held  by  His  Majesty's  Government).  We  are, 
however,  still  hopeful  that  a  method  of  adjusting  the  partition 
of  surplus  revenue,  more  acceptable  to  the  clients  of  the 
Company,  may  be  eventually  arrived  at. 

It  must  not  be  forgotten  that  the  Company  spends  every  year 
large  sums  on  the  improvement  of  the  Canal,  and  that  a  scheme 
of  important  works  is  being  carried  out  with  a  view,  on  the  one 
hand,  to  widen  the  Canal,  which  will  enable  the  passage  to  be 
made  more  quickly ;  and,  on  the  other,  to  deepen  it,  which 


would  enable  a  large  number  of  vessels  to  carry  more  cargo, 
and  thus  increase  their  freight-carrying  capacity.  If  further 
sacrifices  were  asked  and  obtained  from  the  shareholders  the 
result  would  probably  be  a  delay  in  carrying  out  the  work  of 
improvement,  if  not  its  entire  cessation,  a  result  known  to  be 
quite  contrary  to  the  wishes  of  the  shipowners. 

3.  That  the  inter-Empire  trade  would  be  beneficially  affected 
is,  no  doubt,  a  very  valid  reason  for  both  the  Home  and  Colonial 
Governments  to  press  for  further  reductions ;  but  these  would 
obviously   have   a   precisely  opposite   effect   upon   the   foreign 
rivals  of  our  maritime  commerce  through  the  Canal,  and   it 
would  be  futile  to  urge  this  argument  upon  our  Continental 

4.  It  has  often  been  alleged  that  the  volume  of  traffic  through 
the  Canal  would  increase  on  a  reduction  of  tariff ;  but  this  con- 
tention is  not  wholly  borne  out  by  the  facts,  for  the  reasons 
that  we  have  already  assigned.     While  we  do  not  altogether 
deny  that  some  slight  increase  of  volume  has  followed  reductions 
of  tariff,  the  only  conspicuous  result  is  a  diminution  of  receipts. 
This  is  especially  apparent  in  the  present  year,  when  the  tariff 
has  just  been  reduced  by  75  centimes.     The  consequent  loss 
would,  at  the  present  date,  have  amounted  to  at  least  £400,000, 
if  the  traffic  had  not  been  considerably  increased  by  the  return 
to  Europe,  through  the  Canal,  of  the  Russian  troops  engaged  in 
the  Far  East. 

The  Board  of  Trade,  having  been  kept  fully  informed  by  the 
Foreign  Office  of  all  the  somewhat  complicated  conditions 
affecting  Suez  Canal  tariffs,  will  be  in  a  position  to  give  its 
views  upon  the  points  raised  by  Lord  Northcote  in  his  despatch. 
While  we  cordially  agree  in  the  general  aspirations  of  the 
Australian  Government,  we  have,  as  the  representatives  of  the 
financial  interests  of  His  Majesty's  Government,  to  protect 
the  large  revenue  which  now  accrues  to  the  Exchequer ;  and 
*we  submit  that  any  further  reductions  of  the  tariff  would 
practically  amount  to  a  subsidy  to  ships  using  the  Canal,  at 
the  cost,  to  a  great  extent,  of  pecuniary  loss  to  His  Majesty's 

We  have,  etc.         (Signed)        H.  AUSTIN  LEE. 



No.  3.  Foreign  Office  to  Board  of  Trade. 

Foreign  Office,  September  12,  1906. 

SIR, — With  reference  to  your  letter  of  the  6th  July  last,  I  am 
directed  by  Secretary  Sir  E.  Grey  to  transmit  to  you,  to  be  laid 


before  the  Board  of  Trade,  the  accompanying  copy  of  a  despatch 
from  the  British  Directors  of  the  Suez  Canal  Company,1  in  con- 
nection with  the  request  of  the  Governor-General  of  Australia 
that  His  Majesty's  Government  should  use  their  influence 
to  secure  a  reduction  in  the  charges  imposed  by  the  Canal 

A  copy  of  this  despatch  has  also  been  communicated  to  the 
Treasury,  and  Sir  E.  Grey  would  request  that  the  reply  to 
the  Governor-General  of  Australia  should  be  deferred  until  the 
Lords  Commissioners  have  had  the  opportunity  of  expressing 
their  views  on  the  subject. 

I  am,  etc.         (Signed)        F.  A.  CAMPBELL. 

No.  4.  Foreign  Office  to  Treasury. 

Foreign  Office,  September  12,  1906. 

SIR, — I  am  directed  by  Secretary  Sir  E.  Grey  to  transmit  to 
you,  to  be  laid  before  the  Lords  Commissioners  of  the  Treasury, 
the  accompanying  copy  of  a  despatch  from  the  British  Directors 
of  the  Suez  Canal  Company,  in  connection  with  the  request  of 
the  Governor-General  of  Australia  that  His  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment should  use  their  influence  to  secure  a  reduction  in  the 
charges  imposed  by  the  Canal  authorities. 

A  copy  of  this  despatch  has  also  been  communicated  to  the 
Board  of  Trade,  but  Sir  E.  Grey  has  requested  that  that 
Department  should  defer  making  any  reply  to  the  Colonial 
Office  pending  the  receipt  of  their  Lordships'  views  on  the 

I  am,  etc.        (Signed)        F.  A.  CAMPBELL. 

No.  5.  Treasury  to  Foreign  Office. 

(Received  October  2.) 

Treasury  Chambers,  October  1,  1906. 

SIR, — I  have  laid  before  the  Lords  Commissioners  of  His 
Majesty's  Treasury  Mr.  Campbell's  letter  of  the  12th  ultimo, 
inclosing  copy  of  a  despatch  from  the  British  Directors  of  the 
Suez  Canal  Company  on  the  subject  of  the  Australian  Govern- 
ment's request  that  the  influence  of  His  Majesty's  Government 
may  be  used  to  secure  a  reduction  in  the  charges  imposed  on 
traffic  through  the  Canal. 

In  reply  their  Lordships  direct  me  to  acquaint  you,  for  the 
information  of  the  Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs,  that 
they  concur  in  the  views  expressed  by  the  Directors,  and  that 

JNo.  2. 


a  reply  to  the  Australian  Government  in  that  sense  would  meet 
with  their  approval. 

While  my  Lords  are  in  full  sympathy  with  the  object  of  the 
Commonwealth  Ministers,  they  do  not  think  that  anything 
would  be  gained  by  the  attempt  to  pursue  that  object  without 
due  regard  to  the  interests  of  those  who  have  a  purely  financial 
concern  in  the  affairs  of  the  Canal. 

I  am,  etc.         (Signed)        E.  W.  HAMILTON. 

No.  6.  Board  of  Trade  to  Foreign  Office. 

(Received  October  17.) 

Board  of  Trade,  October  16,  1906. 

SIR, — With  reference  to  your  letter  of  the  llth  instant, 
transmitting  a  copy  of  a  letter  from  the  Treasury  respecting 
the  Australian  Government's  request  that  the  influence  of  His 
Majesty's  Government  may  be  used  to  secure  a  reduction  in 
the  Suez  Canal  dues,  I  am  directed  by  the  Board  of  Trade  to 
state,  for  the  information  of  Sir  E.  Grey,  that  they  propose 
to  send  a  copy  of  the  despatch  from  the  British  Directors  of 
the  Suez  Canal  Company  which  accompanied  your  letter  of  the 
12th  ultimo  to  the  Colonial  Office,  and  to  communicate  to  that 
Department  the  substance  of  the  Treasury  letter,  with  an 
intimation  that  the  Board,  having  regard  to  all  the  circum- 
stances of  the  case,  acquiesce  in  the  views  expressed  therein. 

The  Board  will  be  glad  to  be  informed  whether  Sir  E.  Grey 
concurs  in  this  proposal. 

I  am,  etc.         (Signed)        WALTER  J.  HOWELL. 

No.  7.  Foreign  Office  to  Board  of  Trade. 

Foreign  Office,  October  18,  1906. 

SIR, — I  am  directed  by  Secretary  Sir  E.  Grey  to  acknowledge 
the  receipt  of  your  letter  of  the  16th  instant  respecting  a 
reduction  of  the  Suez  Canal  dues,  and  to  state  that  he  concurs 
in  the  proposal  of  the  Board  of  Trade  as  expressed  therein. 

I  am,  etc.         (Signed)        E.  GORST. 

No.  8. 

The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  Governor-General  Lord  Northcote. 

Downing  Street,  October  31,  1906. 

MY  LORD, — I  have  the  honour  to  transmit,  for  the  informa- 
tion of  your  Ministers,  the  accompanying  copy  of  a  letter  l  from 

i  No.  2. 


the  British  Directors  of  the  Suez  Canal  Company  regarding  the 
charges  imposed  by  the  Suez  Canal  authorities. 

I  am  informed  that  the  Lords  Commissioners  of  the  Treasury 
and  the  Board  of  Trade  concur  in  the  views  expressed  by  the 
Directors,  and  that  although  they  are  in  full  sympathy  with 
the  object  of  your  Ministers,  they  do  not  think  that  anything 
would  be  gained  by  an  attempt  to  pursue  that  object  without 
due  regard  to  the  interests  of  those  who  have  a  purely  financial 
concern  in  the  affairs  of  the  Suez  Canal. 

I  am,  etc.        (Signed)        ELGIN. 

EXERCISE  No.    3. 


No.  1.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  April  2,  1906.) 

Government  House,  Suva,  Fiji,  February  20,  1906. 
MY  LORD, —  I  have  the  honour  to  transmit  for  your  informa- 
tion a  copy  of  an  agreement l  between  the  Government  of  Fiji 
and  the  Colonial  Sugar  Refining  Company,  Limited,  for  the 
completion  of  a  road  and  tramline  between  the  districts  of  Ba 
and  Lautoka  and  Nadi,  and  to  report,  as  follows,  on  the  circum- 
stances which  have  led  up  to  the  agreement. 

2.  Towards  the  end  of  1904  the  Colonial  Sugar  Refining  Com- 
pany invited  the  consent  of  the  Government  to  the  construction 
by  the  Company  of  a  road  and  tramline,  to  connect  existing 
roads,  between  Ba  and  Lautoka,  partly  through  Government 
and    Native   Lands,   and   partly   through   land   under  Crown 
Grant  to  certain   private   individuals.     To   this  proposal  the 
Government  was  willing  to  consent,  and  obtained  the  consent 
of.  the  Natives,  but  nothing  further  was  done  in  the  matter 
pending  the  settlement  of  negotiations  between  the  Company 
and  the  other  owners  of  land  through  which  the  road  must 

3.  In  July,  1905,  the  Company  again  addressed  the  Govern- 
ment, stating  that  it  had  been  unable  to  come  to  terms  with 
three  European  landowners,  viz.,  Messrs.  Smart   and  Pfluger 
and  Dr.  Hallen,  and  it  made  the  request  that  the  Government 

1  Not  printed. 


should  exercise  its  right  of  resuming  the  land  required  on  the 
ground  that  the  road  was  not  merely  necessary  for  the  Com- 
pany's operations,  but  that  the  construction  of  the  thoroughfare 
and  the  provision,  as  I  shall  presently  explain,  of  a  tram  service 
for  passengers  and  goods,  gave  the  undertaking  the  status  of  a 
very  advantageous  public  purpose. 

4.  It  may  be  useful  here  briefly  to  explain  the  general  con- 
ditions which  have  given  rise  to  the  undertaking  which  is  the 
subject  of  this  agreement.  The  Colonial  Sugar  Ee fining  Com- 
pany, Limited,  the  largest  sugar  exporting  company  and 
perhaps  the  most  important  commercial  factor  in  the  pros- 
perity of  the  Colony,  besides  its  mills  on  the  Rewa,  on  the 
south  side  of  Viti  Levu,  and  at  Labasa  in  Vanua  Levu,  now 
owns  two  large  mills  at  Rarawai  and  Lautoka,  both  on  the  north 
coast  of  Viti  Levu.  It  is  with  these  two  latter  mills,  and  the 
long  coast  land,  some  45  miles  long,  from  which  these  derive 
their  supply  of  cane,  that  we  are  here  concerned.  Rarawai, 
the  older  of  the  two  mills,  is  on  the  Ba  river  and  nearly  at  the 
eastern  end  of  this  particular  stretch  of  cane  land  ;  Lautoka  is 
some  27  miles  to  the  westward  ;  and  the  cane  land,  with  some 
more  or  less  inconsiderable  breaks,  extends  some  18  miles 
further  westward  to  Nadi.  These  mills  are  fed  with  cane 
produced  not  only  on  the  many  plots  of  the  Company's  own 
land  scattered  from  end  to  end  of  the  area,  but  also  to  a  large 
and  increasing  extent  with  that  produced  on  many  pieces  of 

mys  ana  others — lying 
round  Rarawai,  with  that  mill  ;  and  a  similar  tramline  runs 
from  Teidamu,  i.e.,  the  eastward  extremity  of  the  present 
Lautoka  cultivation,  past  Lautoka  mill  and  on  some  23  miles 
beyond  to  Nadi.  The  use  of  these  two  tramlines  is  to  carry  to 
the  respective  mills  all  cane,  whether  grown  by  the  Company 
or  by  others.  The  two  lines  are,  however,  not  connected,  there 
being  a  gap  of  some  1 8  miles  between  the  end  of  the  Rarawai 
system  and  Teidamu  on  the  Lautoka  system  ;  and  the  object  of 
the  Company  is  for  its  own  business  and  that  of  its  cane- 
growing  clients  to  connect  the  two.  A  track,  partly  good  and 
partly  very  bad,  but  never  worthy  of  the  name  of  road,  runs 
through  the  whole  district,  and  the  object  of  the  Government  is 
to  get  both  a  good  road  and  a  tram  service  open  for  the  use  of 
the  public,  both  those  resident  within  the  district  and  those 
having  occasion  to  pass  through  the  district  to  the  parts  beyond. 
The  Agreement  which  I  am  now  forwarding  will  give  both 
those  advantages,  and  will  without  doubt  tend  greatly  to  the 
general  development  of  that  part  of  the  country. 


5.  The  Company  undertakes  to  make  a  roadway  for  foot  or 
vehicular  traffic,  including  drains,  20  feet  wide,  a  grass  track 
for  cattle  20  feet  wide,  and  a  track  23  feet  wide  upon  which  it 
is  to   be  allowed  to  lay  down  a  tramline.      It  is   to  provide 
suitable  bridges  or  culverts  as  required,  and  to  hand  over  the 
road,  when  completed  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  Commissioner  of 
Works,  to  be  proclaimed  as  a  public  thoroughfare,  the  tramline, 
except  where  it  passes  over  the  bridges,  being  set  apart  for  the 
use  of  the   Company,  who,  however,  bind   themselves  to  run 
certain  special  passenger  trains  for  the  use  of  the  public,  and 
for  the  conveyance  of  the  goods  of  the  public. 

6.  Provision  is  made  in  the  first  clause  of  the  Agreement  that 
Government  shall  reserve  such  land  and  acquire  such  native 
land  as  may  be  necessary  for  the  purpose  indicated  ;  and  clause 
9  provides  that  the  Company  shall  pay  reasonable  compensation 
for  damage  that  may  be  caused  to  crops  by  the  carrying  out  of 
the  project.     Arrangements   have    been  made   to  acquire  the 
native  land,  estimated  in  all  at  70  acres,  as  may  be  required,  at 
a  cost  of  £1  per  acre,  and  the  necessary  notification  of  resump- 
tion of  the  area  required  for  the  road  has  been  published  in  the 
Royal  Gazette,  and  given  to  the  landholders  concerned. 

7.  I  must  add  that  Mr.  Smart  protested  against  the  resump- 
tion of  that  portion  of  his  land  necessary  for  the  road,  and  that 
he   saw   me   personally  on    the    matter.     Messrs.    Pfluger  and 
Hallen  have  also  made  formal  protest  to  the  same  effect.     But 
after  very  careful  consideration,  both  personal  and  on  several 
occasions  in  Executive  Council,  I  am  of  opinion  that  it  is  greatly 
for  the  public  interest  that  the    Crown    should,    in  this  case, 
exercise  the  right,  specially  reserved  to  it  in  the  Crown  Grants 
to  these  persons,  to  resume  such  of  the  land  as  is  necessary  for 
this  public  purpose  ;  and  I  am  certain  that  the  estates  of  the 
protestants  will  benefit  as  will  the  rest  of  the  district. 

8.  I  trust  the  Agreement  will  meet  with  your  Lordship's 

I  have,  etc.,  EVERARD  IM  THURN. 

No.  2.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  December  10,  1906.) 

Government  House,  Suva,  Fiji,  October  26,  1906. 
MY  LORD, — I  have  the  honour  to  transmit  for  the  signification 
of  His  Majesty's  pleasure,  two  sealed  and  seven  plain  copies  of 
Ordinance  No.  XVI.  of  1906,  "An  Ordinance  to  amend  the 
Law  relating  to  the  Acquisition  of  Land  by  the  Crown,"  together 
with  the  explanatory  report  *  thereon  by  the  Attorney -General. 

1  Not  printed. 


2.  It   is   my   duty   to   add   that  in   Legislative  Council  the 
Ordinance  met  with  the  unanimous  opposition  of  the  Elected 
Members,  whose  prayer  that  His  Majesty  may  not  assent  to  it 
is  transmitted  by  this  mail,  that  the  two  Native  Members  voted 
against  it,  and  that  I  promised  the  Elected  M  embers  that  no 
action  would  be  taken  under  the  Ordinance  until  your  reply  to 
their  petition  has  been  received. 

3.  The  Ordinance  is,  in  my  opinion,  very  desirable  owing  to 
the  peculiar  circumstances  of  this  Colony  where  almost  all  the 
land  is  vested  in  the  natives,  and  such  of  it  as  has  been  alienated 
is  in  the  hands  of  a  very  few  Europeans.     The  Government  has 
practically  no  land  at  its  disposal  for  settlement  purposes,  and, 
although  so  far  little  difficulty  has  been  experienced  in  dealings 
between  the  Government  and  the  natives,  dealings  between  the 
natives  and  Europeans  and  European  landowners  and  others 
have  not  been  so  fortunate.     A  reference  to  my  despatch  of 
20th  February  will  serve  to  illustrate  the  kind  of  difficulty  to 
which  I  refer.     The  proposal  of  the  Colonial  Sugar  Refining 
Company  to  erect  a  new  section  of  tramline  between  their  Ba 
and  Lautoka  Estates  and  thus  to  complete  the  tramline  which 
will  shortly   serve  some   70   miles   of  that   coast,  was  nearly 
thrown  out  owing  to  the  attitude  adopted  by  European  land- 
owners,  and  was  only   carried  out    by   the    interposition   of 
Government,  which  acquired   the   land  for   the  purposes  of  a 
road  and  upon  the  land  so  acquired  allowed  the  company  to 
make  the  road  and  to  erect  a  tramline  available  for  public  use. 

4.  The  procedure  adopted  in  the  case  cited  was  not,  it  seemed 
to  me,  unexceptionable,  in  that  the  land  resumed  for  a  public 
road  was  also  put  to  other  purposes,  which,  though  serving  a 
purpose  very  useful  both  to  the  Colony  at  large  and  to  the 
travelling  public,  might  possibly  be  described  as  not  actually  a 
public  purpose  in  the  strict  sense  of  those  words.     A  similar 
case  might  arise  at  any  moment,  and  I  consider  the  Governor 
in  Council  would  be  amply  justified  in  using  the  powers  con- 
ferred by  the  present  Ordinance  if  the  parties  failed  to  come  to 
an  agreement. 

5.  To  turn  now  to  the  question  of  native  lands.     The  natives 
possess,  as  your  Lordship  is  aware,  vast  areas  of  land  which 
they  do  not  and  cannot  utilise  except  by  lease  or  sale  to  non- 
natives,  and  it  is  only  within  the  last  few  months  that  they 
have  been  allowed  to  sell  their  lands  or  that  any  great  demand 
has  been  made  for  acquisition  of  these  lands.     But  attention 
has  now  been  drawn  to  the  Colony,  and  applications  in  large 
numbers  are  being  received  from  settlers  desiring  to  come  here ; 
and,  unless  the  Colony  is  to  remain  undeveloped,  means  must 
be  taken  to  ensure  their  getting  land  on  reasonable  terms.     In 


most  cases  little  difficulty  is  experienced  ;  but,  as  applications 
increase  and  the  natives  realise  that  from  them  only  can  land 
be  obtained,  I  am  by  no  means  sure  that  they  will  not  retard 
settlement  by  refusing  to  accept  lower  prices  for  land  in  remote 
districts  and  unsuited  for  cane-growing,  than  they  demand  and 
receive  in  and  around  the  sugar  centres. 

6.  I  should  like  here  to  say  that  I  am  satisfied  that  the  votes 
of  the  two  Native  Members  of  Legislative  Council  against  the 
Ordinance  meant  little  but  were  solely  due  to  the  prompting  of 
the  European  Members  ;    and  in  this  respect  it  is  somewhat 
interesting  to  note  that  at  least  one  of  the  European  Members 
at  a  subsequent  stage  of  the  same  sitting  declared  in  favour  of 
at  any  rate  restricting  the  operation  of  the  Ordinance  to  Native 
lands  only. 

7.  A  proposal  has  been  mooted  by  a  private  company  to  lay  a 
railway  between  Suva  and  Eewa.     Such  an  undertaking  would 
very  greatly  and  directly  benefit  the  Colony  ;  but  if  the  pro- 
posal were  finally  adopted,  both  by  the  Government  and  the 
Company,  it  could,  I  am  convinced,  acquire  the  land  on  suffi- 
ciently reasonable  terms,  only  if  the  powers  conferred  by  the 
present  Ordinance  were  exercised  by  the  Government. 

8.  I  cannot  conceive  that  the  Governor  in  Council  will,  in  any 
case,  use  the  powers  conferred  on  him  in  any  arbitrary  manner  : 
and  land  can  be  acquired  under  the  Ordinance  only  upon  pay- 
ment of  compensation  to  be  fixed  as  in  the  case  of  land  acquired 
for  public  purposes,  i.e.,  that  the  market  price,  or  possibly  a 
somewhat   higher    rate   would    be    fixed    by  the    arbitrators 
appointed  by  the  two  parties  or  failing  agreement  by  them,  by 
the  Supreme  Court. 

9.  Having  given  due  consideration  to  the  matter  and  to  the 
views  of  the  Elected  and  Native  Members,  I  recommend  that 
His  Majesty  be  not  advised  to  exercise  his  powers  of  disallow- 
ance in  respect  of  the  Ordinance. 

I  have,  etc.,          •  EVERARD  IM  THURN. 

Enclosure  in  No.  2. 

[L.S.]  /  assent. 


24th  October,  1906. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Governor  with  the  advice  and  consent  of 
the  Legislative  Council  as  follows  : — 

1.  This  Ordinance  may  be  cited  for  all   purposes  as  "The 
Acquisition  of  Lands  Ordinance  1906." 


2.  In  "The  Crown  Acquisition  of  Lands  Ordinance  1878" 
and  "The  Native  Lands  Acquisition  Ordinance  1905"  the 
expression  "  public  purposes "  shall  be  deemed  to  include  any 
undertaking  proposal  or  policy  which  may  appear  to  the 
Governor  in  Council  desirable  as  directly  benefiting  the  Colony. 

Passed  in  Council  this  sixteenth  day  of  October  in  the  year 
of  our  Lord  one  thousand  nine  hundred  and  six. 

No.  3.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  December  10,  1906.) 

Government  House,  Suva,  Fiji,  November  3,  1906. 
Mr  LORD, — I  have  the  honour  to  transmit  a  copy  of  a 
formal  protest  from  the  Honourable  the  Elected  Members  of 
the  Legislative  Council,  against  assent  being  given  to  Ordinance 
No.  XVI.  of  1906,  "An  Ordinance  to  amend  the  Law  relating 
to  the  Acquisition  of  Land  by  the  Crown,"  and  to  invite  refer- 
ence to  the  remarks  on  the  subject  contained  in  my  despatch  of 
the  26th  ultimo. 

I  have,  etc.,  EVERARD  IM  THURN. 

Enclosure  in  No.  3. 

From  the  Elected  Members  of  Council  to  His  Excellency 

the  Governor. 

(Dated  October  17,  1906.) 


YOUR  EXCELLENCY, — "We,  the  undersigned,  the  whole  of  the 
elected  members  of  the  Legislative  Council  of  the  Colony  of 
Fiji,  present  at  a  meeting  of  that  Council  on  the  16th  day  of 
October,  1906,  have  the  honour  to  protest  against  the  passing 
of  the  Bill  intituled  "  An  Ordinance  to  amend  the  law  relating 
to  the  acquisition  of  land  by  the  Crown,"  on  the  ground  that 
adequate  provision  has  already  been  made  by  the  Ordinances 
referred  to  in  the  second  section  of  the  said  Bill  for  the  acquisi- 
tion by  the  Crown  of  all  land  that  may  be  legitimately  required. 
We  beg  to  request  that  this  protest  be  sent  to  the  Right 
Honourable  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies  with  a  copy 
of  the  shorthand  notes  of  the  debate  on  the  Bill,  and  request 
that  your  Excellency  will  inform  him  that  the  two  native 
members  of  the  Council  on  its  debate  voted  against  the  Bill. 
We  have,  etc.,  HENRY  MARKS. 




W.  McRAE. 


No.  4.  The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor. 

Downing  Street,  January  28,  1907. 

SIR, — I  have  the  honour  to  inform  you  that  His  Majesty  will 
not  be  advised  to  exercise  his  powers  of  disallowance  with 
respect  to  Ordinance  No.  16  of  1906,  of  the  Legislature  of  Fiji, 
shortly  intituled  "The  Acquisition  of  Lands  Ordinance,  1906," 
of  which  a  transcript  accompanied  your  despatch  of  the  26th 
October  last. 

2.  The  powers  given  by  the  Ordinance  to  the  Governor  in 
Council  are,  however,  very  wide,  and   might  be   exercised  to 
facilitate  schemes  which  are,  in  fact,  of  a  purely  private  nature. 
They  should  not,  I   think,  be  exercised  without  considerable 
caution  for  such  purposes,  and  I  shall  be  glad  if  you  will  in 
every  case  refer  to  me,  for  approval,  before  employing  them  for 
the  acquisition  of  land  to  be  used  in  undertakings  which,  though 
they  may  be  of  public  utility,  are  also  in  the  interest  of  private 
persons  or  companies. 

3.  I  have  received  the  protest  of  the  Elected  Members  of  the 
Legislative  Council,  which  was  forwarded  in  your  despatch  of 
the  3rd  November,  and  shall  be  glad  if  you  will  cause  them  to 
be  informed  in  reply  that  similar  powers  to  those  given  by  the 
present  Ordinance  have  been  conferred  upon  the  Governor  in 
Council  in  other  colonies,  and  that  they  will  not  be  exercised  to 
facilitate  schemes  which  are,  in  fact,  of  a  purely  private  nature 
without  previous  reference  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

I  have,  etc.,        ELGIN. 

EXERCISE  No.  4. 


No.  1. 

The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne. 

(Sent  5.8  p.m.,  December  15,  1905.) 


December  15.  No.  1.  With  reference  to  the  last  paragraph 
of  Mr.  Lyttelton's  telegram  of  27th  October,1  in  which  it  was 
suggested  that  it  would  be  good  policy  for  the  mine  owners 
voluntarily  to  stop  importation  for  the  next  six  months,  but  to 

aNot  printed. 


which  no  reference  was  made  in  your  telegram  of  the  4th 
December,1  have  you  any  observations  to  make  upon  the 
point  ? 

For  what  numbers  of  coolies  have  licences  been  issued  up  to 
the  present  date  ? 

Please  telegraph  your  reply  as  soon  as  possible. 

No.  2.  The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne. 
(Sent  2.45  p.m.,  December  19,  1905.) 

December  19.  No.  2.  Matter  most  urgent.  My  telegram 
of  15th  December,  No.  1.  Please  let  me  know  at  once  total 
number  of  Chinese  for  importation  of  which  permission  has 
been  given,  as  well  as  numbers  arrived  or  at  sea,  in  addition  to 
those  reported  up  to  end  of  October. 

No.  3.  Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 
(Received  11.50  a.m.,  December  20,  1905.) 

December  20.     No.  1.     Matter  most  urgent.     Your  telegram 
19th  December,  No.  2,  only  just  received. 
Numbers  asked  for  are  as  follows  : — 

Total  number  now  on  the  Rand       -        -         -     47,241 
Now  on  their  way  here    -----       Nil 
Asked  for  and  in  respect  of  whom  licences  to 

import  been  granted          -  14,700 

Total  -        -        -    61,941 

I  have  not  had  time  to  ascertain  what  steps  have  been  taken 
in  China  in  connection  with  the  licences  which  have  been 
granted  in  the  way  of  provisional  recruiting  and  chartering  of 
ships  or  what  expenditure  this  involves. 

Referring  to  your  telegram  15th  December,  No.  1,  my 
impression  is  mine  owners  would  be  most  unwilling  to  stop 
importation  as  they  have  recently  gone  to  enormous  expense  in 
development  work,  the  whole  of  which  will  be  thrown  away  if 
they  do  not  get  labour  supply  sufficient  to  make  production 
keep  pace  with  development. 

JNot  printed. 


No.  4.  The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne. 
(Sent  6.30  p.m.,  December  20,  1905.) 

December  20.  No.  1.  With  reference  to  your  telegram, 
No.  1,  of  20th  December,  His  Majesty's  Government  consider 
that  the  experiment  of  the  introduction  of  Chinese  labourers 
should  not  be  extended  further  until  His  Majesty's  Government 
can  learn  through  an  elected  and  really  representative  Legisla- 
ture the  opinion  of  the  Colony,  and  the  Cabinet  has  accordingly 
decided  that  the  recruitment,  embarkation,  and  importation  of 
Chinese  coolies  shall  be  arrested,  pending  decision  as  to  grant 
of  Responsible  Government. 

It  is  desired  that  every  available  step  should  be  taken  to 
prevent  shipment  from  China  of  the  14,700  mentioned  in  your 
telegram  under  reference.  Please  confer  with  your  Law  Officers 
and  telegraph  whether  by  revocation  of  licences  under  Section  29 
of  Foreign  Labour  Importation  Ordinance  or  otherwise  this  can 
be  promptly  effected. 

No.  5.     The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne. 
(Sent  7  p.m.,  December  21,  1905.) 

December  21.  No.  2.  Referring  to  my  telegram  of  yesterday. 
In  coming  to  their  decision  His  Majesty's  Government  had 
before  them  and  took  into  consideration  the  following  circum- 
stances and  facts  : — 

From  the  beginning  the  importation  of  Chinese  labour  was 
regarded  as  an  experiment  and  was  accepted  by  His  Majesty's 
late  Government  as  necessary  to  meet  a  serious  shortage  of 
labour.  Chinese  labour  was  permitted  as  a  supplement  to,  not 
as  a  substitute  for,  Kaffir  labour,  and  it  was  necessary  for  His 
Majesty's  Government  to  be  assured  that  the  numbers  intro- 
duced were  within  the  powers  of  supervision  and  control  of  the 
Transvaal  Government.  Mr.  Lyttelton  on  more  than  one 
occasion  desired  to  be  specifically  assured  on  this  point.  The 
report  of  Mr.  Evans,  the  late  Superintendent  of  Foreign  Labour, 
bearing  date  February,  and  published  to  Parliament,  stated  that 
about  55,000  would  apparently  complete  the  requirements  of 
the  mines  which  have  decided  to  work  with  Chinese  labour 
and  that  this  number  would  arrive  by  the  end  of  July  or 
August.  After  that  an  occasional  ship  would  suffice  unless 
circumstances  altered  or  the  unforeseen  occurred. 

On  your  arrival  you  found,  on  inquiring  into  matters,  that  a 


new  system  required  to  be  introduced  for  the  better  control  of 
the  labourers  under  which  summary  jurisdiction  could  be 
exercised  by  the  Superintendent  and  a  larger  number  of  In- 
spectors who  are  conversant  with  the  Chinese  language. 

An  amending  Ordinance  was  accordingly  passed,  with  Mr. 
Lyttelton's  approval,  giving  the  necessary  magisterial  powers  to 
the  Superintendent  and  Inspectors.  Mr.  Lyttelton  has  im- 
pressed the  need  for  special  caution  in  working  the  new 
system  with  regard  to  the  deduction  of  fines  from  wages  and 
with  regard  to  the  collective  fine.  The  new  arrangement,  which 
came  into  force  after  19th  September,  is  therefore  on  its  trial, 
and  cannot  be  pronounced  to  be  a  full  success  until  further 
time  has  elapsed  and  its  administration  tested. 

Uneasiness  was  caused  on  the  Witwatersrand  by  the  lawless 
acts  of  certain  wandering  bodies  of  Chinese  in  August  and 
September  ;  these  occurrences  caused  a  Boer  deputation,  with 
General  Botha  at  its  head,  to  wait  upon  Sir  Arthur  Lawley  and 
to  represent  that  the  Chinese  should  be  sent  back  to  their  native 

Sir  A.  Lawley,  in  reply  to  the  deputation,  assured  them  that 
the  Government  had  taken  steps  to  exercise  sufficient  control, 
and  pointed  out  that  the  repatriation  of  the  Chinese  would 
bring  about  a  grave  financial  and  commercial  crisis. 

I  understand  that  you  are  fully  satisfied  that  there  is  no 
reason  to  apprehend  any  serious  trouble  in  the  future  arising 
from  desertions  and  lawless  acts. 

But  it  is  clear  that  there  are  indications  of  local  opposition 
to  the  importation. 

The  real  wishes  of  the  majority  of  the  inhabitants  of  the 
Transvaal  in  regard  to  the  importation,  or  as  to  any  limitations 
or  restrictions  by  which  it  should  be  confined,  have  not  yet  been 
authoritatively  expressed  and  cannot  be  ascertained  until  an 
elective  Legislature  has  been  called  together. 

Native  labour  has  largely  increased  since  January,  1904, 
when  it  was  represented  to  His  Majesty's  late  Government 
that  a  grave  financial  crisis  would  ensue  unless  immediate 
relief  was  afforded  by  Chinese  labour.  The  numbers  then  were 
75,000,  and  are  now  96,000,  practically  on  a  level  with  the 
numbers  in  1899  at  the  time  of  maximum  gold  production  before 
the  war  took  place.  In  addition  there  are  now  on  the  Band 
over  47,000  Chinese. 

While  reserving  their  opinion  and  freedom  of  action  in  the 
whole  matter,  His  Majesty's  Government  consider,  as  I  tele- 
graphed to  you  yesterday,  that  the  experiment  of  the  introduc- 
tion of  Chinese  labourers  should  not  be  extended  further  until 
they  can  learn  the  opinion  of  the  Colony  through  an  elected  and 


really  representative  Legislature,  and  they  have  accordingly 
decided  that  recruiting,  embarkation,  and  importation  of 
Chinese  coolies  shall  be  arrested,  pending  a  decision  as  to  the 
grant  of  responsible  Government  to  the  Colony.  They  are  not 
prepared,  in  all  the  circumstances,  to  be  responsible  for  further 

His  Majesty's  Government  trust  that  the  inhabitants  of  the 
Transvaal  will  recognise  that  they  have  felt  it  their  duty  to 
take  this  step  deliberately  and  after  a  careful  review  of  the 

No.  6.     The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne. 
(Sent  6  p.m.,  December  22,  1905.) 

[Answered  by  Nos.  11  and  14.] 

December  22.  No.  1.  I  await  your  reply  to  my  telegram  of 
20th  December,  No.  1. 

I  shall  be  glad  if,  in  connection  with  the  steps  required  for 
arresting  importation,  you  will  inform  me,  as  soon  as  you  can 
obtain  particulars,  what  licences  for  ships  have  been  granted 
in  accordance  with  Clause  4  of  the  instructions  to  the  Emigra- 
tion Agents  and  how  many  ships  have  been  chartered  in 
connection  with  the  recruitment  and  embarkation  of  the  further 
14,700  labourers  ;  also  to  what  extent  recruiting  has  taken  place. 

I  think  it  would  be  expedient  to  suspend  issue  of  fresh 
licences  for  shipping  or  recruitment,  and,  in  case  of  those  already 
issued,  to  suspend  or  otherwise  endeavour  to  prevent  further 
action,  pending  decision  of  His  Majesty's  Government  as  to 
steps  to  be  taken  in  regard  to  the  14,700  for  whom  importation 
licences  have  been  issued. 

No.  7.      Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 
(Received  3.21  p.m.,  December  23,  1905.) 

December  23.  No.  1.  Licences  for  the  introduction  of 
13,199  coolies  have  been  issued  by  Lieutenant-Governor  since 
27th  October.  On  26th  October  a  meeting  took  place  between 
Superintendent  Foreign  Labour  and  Chamber  of  Mines,  at 
which  Chamber  gave  notice  that  applications  for  licences  for 
introduction  of  16,199  coolies  would  be  made  and  the  Super- 
intendent promised  to  support  them.  Formal  applications 
were  made  by  individual  mines  which  required  the  coolies 


later,  and  the  licences  for  13,199  were  formally  issued  to 
them  on  various  dates  between  12th  November  and  18th 
November.  The  case  of  the  remaining  3,000  coolies  is  still 
outstanding.  The  application  for  their  importation  was  made 
by  the  Randfontein  Estates,  Limited,  one  of  the  Robinson 
Group,  on  18th  November.  The  licence  was  actually  signed  by 
the  Acting  Lieutenant-Governor  on  the  morning  of  20th 
December  before  your  telegram  of  that  date  was  received. 
In  view  of  your  telegram  the  licence  has  not  yet  been  handed 
over  to  Mr.  J.  W.  S.  Langermann  the  Boer  representative  and 
Managing  Director  of  the  Robinson  Group,  but  I  do  not  see 
how  this  case  can  fairly  be  treated  differently  from  the  others 
in  justice  to  the  parties  concerned. 

No.  8. 

Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 

(Received  2.12  p.m.,  December  23,  1905.) 


December  23.  No.  2.  My  telegrams,  No.  1,  20th  December, 
and  No.  1,  23rd  December.  Apparent  discrepancy  between 
figures  given  in  the  two  telegrams  is  explained  as  follows  :  The 
14,700  of  the  first  telegram  includes  the  3,000  coolies  for  the 
Randfontein  Mine,  the  licence  for  which  has  not  been  handed 
over  as  explained  in  the  second  telegram,  but  it  does  not  include 
1,499  coolies  who  have  already  arrived  out  of  the  total  of  16,199 
mentioned  in  my  second  telegram  and  which  were  included  in 
the  13,199  licences  issued  between  12th  November  and  18th 

No.  9. 

Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 

(Received  10.45  p.m.,  December  23,  1905.) 


December  23.  No.  3.  Immediately  on  receipt  of  your  tele- 
gram of  20th  December,  No.  1, 1  referred  the  following  question 
to  the  Attorney-General  of  Transvaal  Sir  Richard  Solomon 
"  what  powers  have  the  Governor  or  Lieutenant-Governor  under 
the  Foreign  Labour  Importation  Ordinance,  1904,  to  revoke 
licences  for  importation  of  labourers  already  issued  ? "  The 
opinion  I  have  received  from  him  to-day  is  as  follows  : — 

Begins  :  Under  Section  7  of  the  said  Ordinance  the  Lieutenant- 
Governor  may  subject  to  its  provisions  grant  a  licence  to 


any  person  to  introduce  labourers  into  this  Colony  to  per- 
form unskilled  labour  only  in  the  exploitation  of  mines 
within  the  Witwatersrand  district.  The  licence  is  given 
the  form  No.  3  of  the  attached  Regulations  framed  under 
Section  29  of  the  Ordinance.  It  will  be  seen  on  reference 
to  this  form  that  the  licence  is  granted  on  certain  terms  and 
conditions  and  may  be  cancelled  on  breach  by  the  holder  of 
any  of  such  conditions. 

I  may  point  out  that  under  Section  30  of  the  Ordinance 
forfeiture  of  a  licence  is  one  of  the  penalties  which  the 
Lieutenant-Governor  may  prescribe  for  the  breach  by  an 
importer  of  labourers  of  any  regulation  made  under  Section 

It  is  clear,  therefore,  that  a  licence  may  be  revoked  or 
cancelled  on  breach  by  the  holder  of  any  condition  of  the 
licence  or  of  any  regulation  made  under  Section  29  of  the 
Ordinance  for  the  breach  of  which  cancellation  of  the  licence 
is  prescribed  as  a  penalty. 

In  my  opinion  although  under  Section  7  of  the  Ordinance 
the  Lieutenant-Governor  may  have  a  discretion  in  the 
issuing  of  a  licence  he  has  no  power  to  revoke  a  licence  once 
issued  by  him  except  on  the  grounds  above  mentioned.  The 
licence  is  an  authority  under  the  Ordinance  to  import 
labourers,  and  when  that  authority  has  been  given  the 
person  to  whom  it  is  given  has  a  right  in  law  to  import 
the  number  of  labourers  mentioned  in  the  licence.  He  may, 
therefore,  ignore  a  withdrawal  of  that  authority  unless  that 
withdrawal  is  authorized  by  the  Ordinance  or  its  regula- 
tions, and  proceed  with  his  importation,  and  that  importa- 
tion could  not  be  lawfully  stopped. 

In  his  telegram  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies 
inquires  whether  the  embarkation  and  importation  of 
Chinese  coolies  under  licences  already  issued  could  be 
arrested  by  revoking  the  licences  under  Section  29  of  the 
said  Ordinance.  There  is  no  regulation  in  force  nor  in  my 
opinion  could  any  such  be  now  framed  to  give  the  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor power  to  revoke  a  licence  at  will.  Such  a 
regulation  would,  in  my  opinion,  be  ultra  vires  and  unrea- 
sonable, and  would  be  specially  unreasonable  when  made 
to  apply  to  licences  issued  before  the  promulgation  of  such 

It  is  right  for  me  to  state  that  where  a  licence  has  been 
signed  by  the  Lieutenant-Governor  but  not  yet  issued  to 
the  applicant  the  case  is  different.  Not  to  issue  such  a 
licence  is,  in  my  opinion,  within  the  powers  given  to  the 
Lieutenant-Governor  under  Section  7  of  the  Ordinance 


which  does  not  make  it  imperative  011  him  to  grant  a  licence 
to  an  applicant  even  though  he  is  satisfied  that  the  require- 
ments mentioned  in  Sub-section  2  of  that  section  have  been 
complied  with,  though  I  am  aware  that  the  contrary  may 
be  argued  with  some  force.  The  licence  cannot  be  said  to 
have  been  granted  until  it  is  issued  to  the  applicant  or  his 
agent.  Eiids. 

In  view  of  this  opinion  do  you  wish  me  to  see  the  Council  of 
the  Chamber  of  Mines  and  represent  the  views  of  His  Majesty's 
Government  to  them  ?  The  whole  of  the  business  of  recruitment 
and  embarkation  of  coolies  in  China  is  managed  by  them  through 
their  agency  called  the  Labour  Importation  Agency.  In  my 
telegram,  No.  1,  20th  December,  I  indicated  to  you  my  impres- 
sion of  their  position  in  the  matter. 

No.  10. 

The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne. 

(Sent  1.25  p.m.,  December  27,  1905.) 


December  27.  No.  2.  Your  telegram,  23rd  December,  No.  3. 
The  licence  for  3,000  labourers  which  has  not  yet  been  issued 
should  be  held  over  pending  decision  of  His  Majesty's  Govern- 

You  should  ascertain  from  the  Chamber  of  Mines  precisely 
what  action  has  been  taken  by  the  Labour  Importation  Associa- 
tion up  to  the  present  under  the  licences  which  have  been  issued ; 
see  my  telegram  22nd  December,  No.  1. 

Please  inform  me  what  licences  were  issued  between  1st 
January  and  27th  October,  with  numbers  and  dates. 

I  shall  need  full  information  as  to  the  circumstances  in  which 
so  large  a  number  were  agreed  to  in  November,  to  place  before 
my  colleagues,  and  for  publication  if  it  is  so  decided  later  on. 

To  what  extent  is  it  expected  that  the  labour  supply  will  be 
affected  next  year  by  the  cessation  to  recruit  from  tropical 
regions  ? 

No.  11. 

Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 

(Received  6.20  p.m.,  December  30,  1905.) 


December  30.  No.  1.  Your  telegrams,  22nd  December, 
No.  1,  and  27th  December,  No.  2.  Chamber  of  Mines  state 


that  considerable  misconception  .appears  to  exist  as  to  scope  and 
nature  Labour  Importation  Agency's  operations.  Following 
summarizes  mode  of  procedure  : — 

Mining  houses  estimate  their  requirements  for  Chinese  labour 
from  time  to  time.  This  is  necessary  owing  to  proved  in- 
sufficiency and  fluctuation  in  native  labour  supply  and  increasing 
demands  due  to  continuous  expansion  of  industry.  Labour 
Agency's  arrangements  are  made  many  months  in  advance.  As 
soon  as  requirements  notified  to  Labour  Agency  instructions 
are  cabled  to  Agency's  representative  in  China,  who  contracts 
for  supply  of  numbers  required.  For  instance,  Agency's  repre- 
sentative was  authorised  on  llth  October  to  arrange  up  to 
thirty-third  shipment  inclusive,  which,  it  is  calculated,  will 
reach  South  Africa  about  the  beginning  of  September  next. 
Actual  number  of  shipments  required  dependent  on  numbers 
coming  forward  successfully  each  ship  ;  for  purposes  of  calcula- 
tion 1,900  coolies  reckoned  a  shipment.  Labour  Agency  is 
therefore  committed  to  contracting  firms  in  China  as  numbers 
required  are  periodically  increased.  There  remains  a  balance 
of  12,750  coolies  on  order  for  whom  licences  have  already  been 
issued  :  no  wastage  provided  for  in  this  number.  Shipping 
arrangements  are  even  more  elaborate,  and  in  addition  to 
steamers  now  on  charter  arrangements  have  already  been  made 
for  further  ships  to  come  on  charter  for  three  years  in  middle 
of  1907,  in  view  of  indentures  of  first  coolies  imported  com- 
mencing to  expire  at  that  period,  and  eventuality  has  to  be 
provided  for  owing  to  uncertainty  as  to  what  percentage  of 
coolies  likely  to  renew  indentures  under  conditions  of  Section  10, 
Labour  Importation  Ordinance.  All  arrangements  have  been 
made  with  a  view  to  continuous  flow  of  immigration  from  China 
being  established  on  permanent  basis.  In  addition  to  enormous 
sums  expended  on  individual  mines  on  importation  past,  present, 
and  prospective,  Labour  Agency  has  spent  quarter  of  a  million, 
little  of  which  is  recoverable.  In  addition,  mining  houses  have 
embarked  on  extensive  programme  of  development  of  non- 
producirig  or  undeveloped  properties  only  justified  on  the 
assumption  that  sufficient  labour  supply  was  assured.  An 
estimate  is  being  made  by  the  mining  houses  to  whom  licences 
have  been  issued  as  to  the  cost  of  machinery,  plant,  building, 
etc.,  ordered  or  erected  in  anticipation  of  arrival  in  due  course 
of  the  12,750  coolies  and  the  further  number  expected  to  arrive 
here  during  1906,  which  estimate  will  certainly  amount  to 
several  millions. 

Chamber  of  Mines  state  that  in  addition  information  will  be 
given  on  the  general  effect  of  suspension  of  importation  on  the 
whole  industry. 


No.  12. 

Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 

(Received  9.30  p.m.,  December  31,  1905.) 
(Extract.)  Telegram. 

December  31.  No.  1.  In  continuation  of  my  telegram  of 
30th  December  total  number  of  coolies  for  whom  licences  have 
been  granted  in  each  month  of  1905  are  as  follows  : — 

January,  4,225  ; 

February,  5,374  ; 

March,  nil ; 

April,  1,931  ; 

May,  3,477  ; 

June,  2,285  ; 

July,  1,529  ; 

August,  2,221  ; 

SeptemlDer,  nil ; 

October,  2,351  ; 

November,  13,199  ; 

December,  3,000  :  viz.  those  for  Randfontein  estates  about 
whom  I  have  already  informed  you  and  for  whom,  in  accordance 
with  your  instructions,  licences  are  being  withheld  for  the 

Large  number  of  licences  issued  in  November  was  due  to 
great  demand  for  labour  consequent  of  continuous  expansion  of 
work  on  the  mines.  By  30th  September  Chamber  of  Mines 
Labour  Importation  Agency  had  already  received  notice  of 
11,500  more  coolies  being  required  at  various  dates,  and 
Superintendent  was  notified  of  this  and  further  requirements 
before  the  26th  October.  On  that  day,  as  stated  in  my  telegram, 
No.  1,  of  the  23rd  December,  Superintendent  of  Foreign  Labour 
met  Chamber  of  Mines,  and,  having  satisfied  himself  that  the 
requirements  of  the  Ordinance  had  been  complied  with  by 
erection  of  proper  accommodation,  etc.,  for  labourers  whom  it 
was  proposed  to  introduce,  promised  to  support  the  application. 

Proportion  of  natives  from  tropical  areas  to  total  number  of 
natives  employed  in  labour  districts  of  whole  Transvaal  is  about 
10  per  cent.  On  the  30th  November  last  there  were  in  the 
employment  of  members  of  the  Witwatersrand  Native  Labour 
Association  6,796  natives  from  tropical  areas  within  British 
territory,  and  3,232  from  tropical  areas  within  Portuguese  terri- 
tory. If,  therefore,  mortality  returns  make  it  impossible  to 
continue  further  recruiting  from  tropical  areas  after  the  31st 
January  next,  the  industry  will  suffer  actual  net  loss  of  6,796 
labourers  if  prohibition  of  further  recruiting  relates  to  British 


territory  only,  or  a  net  loss  of  10,028  if  it  relates  to  all  tropical 
areas.  Potential  loss  would  be  more  important  still,  as  it  is  to 
tropical  areas  only  that  industry  can  look  for  a  possible  increase 
in  or  even  for  means  of  maintaining  present  native  labour 
supply.  Capital  expenditure  estimated  at  £71,000  has  been 
incurred  in  opening  these  areas  for  recruiting  through  provision 
of  rest  camps,  opening  up  routes  for  travel,  establishment  of 
recruiting  stations,  etc. 

No.  13. 

Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 

(Received  10.40  p.m.,  January  1,  1906.) 
(Extract.)  Telegram. 

January  1.     No.  2. 

If  the  importation  of  the  coolies  for  whom  licences  have  been 
issued  is  prevented  by  any  action  which  public  opinion  here 
considers  arbitrary  there  will  be,  I  fear,  a  very  strong  outburst 
of  feeling.  Putting  aside  altogether  the  case  of  the  mineowners 
who  have  spent  very  large  sums  on  shafts,  machinery,  etc., 
please  recollect  that  this  importation  means  work  for  hundreds 
and  hundreds  of  men  now  out  of  work,  and  who  have  for  many 
months  been  patiently  enduring  great  hardships  and  awaiting 
employment,  and  that  it  means  increased  commercial  activity 
for  all. 

If,  on  the  other  hand,  His  Majesty's  Government  allow  licences 
already  issued  to  stand,  their  decision  that  no  fresh  ones  are  to 
be  issued  till  the  opinion  of  the  elected  representatives  of  the 
people  can  be  taken  on  the  subject  next  July  will,  in  my  opinion, 
be  loyally  accepted,  and  there  will  be  no  feeling  of  injustice. 

No.  14. 

Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne  to  the  Earl  of  Elgin. 

(Received  9.25  p.m.,  January  2,  1906.) 


January  2.  No.  1.  Your  telegram  of  22nd  December,  No.  1. 
Licences  are  only  granted  to  ships  under  Clause  4  of  instructions 
to  emigration  agents  when  they  are  on  point  of  sailing,  and  have 
full  complements  of  coolies  on  board.  Next  ship  is  expected  to 
start  about  the  middle  of  this  month. 

Have  referred  question  to  Attorney-General,  and  he  advises 
that  the  recruitnient  and  embarkation  of  labourers  cannot  be 


stopped  by  arbitrary  act  on  the  part  of  the  Transvaal  Govern- 
ment in  respect  to  labourers  whose  importation  has  been 
authorized  by  the  Lieutenant-Governor  under  the  Ordinance. 

The  ships  now  in  use  are  the  "  Indravelli "  and  the  "Cranley " ; 
charter  of  first  expires  on  7th  February,  1908,  and  of  second  at 
the  end  of  1908.  The  "Swanley"  and  the  "Courtfield"  have 
been  chartered  for  three  years  from  May  and  June,  1907, 
respectively,  and  charter  party(ies)  provide  in  all  cases  for 
penalties  for  cancellation  of  contracts. 

No.  15.  The  Earl  of  Elgin  to  Governor  the  Earl  of  Selborne. 
(Sent  7.10  p.m.,  January  5,  1906.) 

January  5.  No.  2.  His  Majesty's  Government  have  carefully 
considered  the  action  to  be  taken  with  regard  to  the  licences  for 
importation  granted  under  the  Labour  Importation  Ordinance, 
after  the  end  of  October  for  coolies  who  have  not  yet  arrived. 
His  Majesty's  Government  regret  that  the  numbers  which  it 
was  stated  by  the  late  Superintendent  of  Foreign  Labour  would 
apparently  complete  the  requirements  of  the  mines,  in  his  report 
to  which  I  referred  in  my  telegram  of  21st  December,  No.  2, 
were  exceeded  without  obtaining  the  assent  of  my  predecessor, 
but,  looking  to  the  opinion  of  the  Attorney-General  of  the 
Transvaal,  the  substance  of  which  is  concurred  in  by  the  Legal 
Advisers  of  the  Crown,  they  regard  it  as  impossible  to  treat 
licences  granted  as  otherwise  than  valid.  Such  licences  could 
therefore  only  be  revoked  by  ex  post  facto  legislation,  which 
would  be  arbitrary  in  its  character. 

In  these  circumstances  His  Majesty's  Government  have  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  licences  in  question  must  be  allowed 
to  stand,  the  responsibility  for  their  being  granted  being  one 
which  must  entirely  rest  with  their  predecessors,  and  in  which 
they  themselves  disclaim  any  share. 

With  reference  to  your  telegram,  No.  1,  of  30th  December, 
His  Majesty's  Government  must  likewise  repudiate  all  responsi- 
bility for  any  arrangements  of  the  Labour  Importation  A  gency 
and  of  the  mines  founded  upon  the  assumption  that  a  large  and 
increasing  importation  of  Chinese  labourers  could  be  treated  as 
permanently  available,  and  would  point  out  that  my  predecessor 
had  intimated  that  the  decision  of  the  question  whether  the 
Transvaal  approved  of  the  Ordinance  for  the  introduction  of 
Chinese  labour  remaining  in  force  would  be  one  for  the  Elective 
Assembly  about  to  be  constituted. 

Any  arrangements  which   the  Labour   Importation  Agency 


think  proper  to  make  in  advance  must,  therefore,  be  regarded 
as  made  entirely  on  their  responsibility  and  at  their,  risk. 

The  position  which  His  Majesty's  Government  have  taken  up 
is  that  they  are  not  responsible  for  any  act  prior  to  their  coming 
into  office  leading  to  the  recruitment,  embarkation,  and  importa- 
tion of  Chinese  labourers,  but  that  from  the  date  on  which  they 
assumed  office  nothing  shall  be  done  to  add  to  the  number  of 
Chinese  labourers  under  contract  for  employment  in  South 
Africa  until  the  Transvaal  shall  have  had  the  opportunity  of 
declaring  its  opinion  through  an  elected  and  really  representa- 
tive Legislature. 

I  note  with  satisfaction  the  opinion  you  express  in  your 
telegram  of  1st  January  that  if  the  licences  already  issued  are 
allowed  to  stand,  the  decision  of  His  Majesty's  Government 
that  no  fresh  ones  are  to  be  issued  will  be  loyally  accepted,  and 
that  there  will  be  no  feeling  of  injustice. 

EXERCISE  No.  5. 


No.  1.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  8.40  p.m.,  January  13,  1907.) 

January  12.  No.  1.  Tentative  inquiries  have  been  made 
from  the  Transvaal  as  to  possibility  of  their  receiving  released 
rebel  prisoners,  were  their  sentences  commuted  to  fines,  as  free 
labourers  on  the  mimss  under  certain  specified  conditions. 
Existing  laws  will  not  admit  of  these  conditions  being  enforced 
and  proposal  has  therefore  come  to  nothing.  However,  the 
present  native  political  situation  would  not  have  permitted  its 
adoption  even  had  law  allowed  and  your  Lordship  approved. 

I  regret  to  inform  you  that  persistent  and  alarming  rumours 
such  as  were  heard  this  time  last  year  are  again  current  and 
have  become  accentuated  during  the  last  ten  days.  I  have 
to-day  received  following  Minute  from  Ministers  in  connection 
with  a  despatch  from  High  Commissioner  dealing  with  subject- 
matter  of  first  sentence  above  : — 

As  your  Excellency  is  aware,  persistent  reports  are  now 
circulating  in  Zululand  and  Natal  amongst  the  natives  there 
by  those  who  have  been  released  that  all  rebels  are  about 


to  be  released  in  consequence  of  an  order  received  from 
across  the  sea  to  effect  that  the  Home  Government  has  told 
this  Government  that  the  rebels  were  only  soldiers  acting 
under  orders  of  their  chiefs,  and  they  should  not,  therefore, 
have  been  punished.  No  more  dangerous  course  therefore 
could  be  pursued  by  Ministers  than  the  adoption  of  any 
act  which  could  give  the  least  ground  for  cultivating  so 
pernicious  a  belief  in  the  native  mind,  whether  that  mind 
be  loyal  or  wicked.  These  reports,  together  with  a  recent 
one  from  Swaziland,  induce  Ministers  to  urge  the  necessity 
of  a  course  of  action  which  will  demonstrate  once  for  all  to 
the  native  mind  that  rebellion  is  not  a  light  matter  or  one 
to  be  followed  by  trivial  consequences. 

2.  Ministers  think   it  essential  that  under  the  circum- 
stances such  demonstration  can  only  be  given  by  the  immedi- 
ate deportation  of  the  ringleaders,  to  the  number  of  about 
twenty-five,  who,  as  long  as  they  are  in  local  custody,  have, 
and  will  have,  opportunities  which  no  guarding  can  repress 
of  conveying  to   their   sympathisers   outside  reports  and 
messages  calculated  to  incite  to  further  disorder,  if  not  to 
attempts  to  obtain  release. 

3.  The  Colonial  Prisoners  Eemoval  Act  cap.  31  of  1884 
appears  to  Ministers  to  provide  the  machinery  to  meet  just 
such  an  emergency  as  confronts  this  Colony  at  this  time. 
It  contemplates,   on    ground  of    expediency,    removal  of 
prisoners   undergoing   sentences    from  one  British   posses- 
sion to  another,  and  under  Section  2,  Subsection  D,  provides 
that  if  otherwise  the  removal  of  the  prisoner  is  expedient 
for  his   safe  custody  or  for   more  efficiently  carrying  his 
sentence  into  effect  in  the  opinion  of  the  removing  authority, 
then  it  may  be  done,  the   removing  authority  being  the 
Secretary  of   State   with  the   concurrence  of  the  Govern- 
ment^) of  the  British  possession(s)  concerned  (Section  5). 

4.  Ministers  think  that   question   of  expediency  in  this 
instance  can  hardly  be  questioned  and  suggest  that  Island 
of  Mauritius,   as   mentioned    by   your  Excellency,   is,   in 
respect  of  climate  and  other  conditions,  a  locality  to  which 
exception  could  not  well  be  taken. 

5.  The  third  section  of  the  Act  deals  with  duration  period 
of  removal,  and  Ministers  note  this,  having  in  mind  the 
consideration   that  this  proposal  for  removal,  though  an 
immediately   pressing    one,  does   not    necessarily   involve 
continuance  of  deportation  to  expiration  of  sentence. 

6.  In  view  of  urgency  of  matter,  Ministers  would  be  glad 
if  your  Excellency  would   cable   this  application  to  the 
Secretary  of  State  whilst  simultaneously  inquiring  of  the 


Mauritius  Government  by  cable  if  it  will  be  as  good  as  to 

assist  us. 

As  a  matter  of  great  emergency  I  beg  for  your  Lordship's 
good  offices  and  that  with  least  possible  delay.  I  am  repeating 
this  telegram  to  Governor,  Mauritius,  that  he  may  have  full 
information  on  the  subject. — McCALLUM. 

No.  2.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  oj  State. 

(Received  8.27  a.m.,  January  18,  1907.) 

January  18.  No.  1.  Eef erring  to  my  telegram  of  12th 
January,  No.  1,  Governor  of  Mauritius  agrees,  subject  to  your 
approval . — McCALLUM. 

No.  3.    The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor  of  Mauritius. 

(Sent  9.30  p.m.,  January  18,  1907.) 
(Extract.)  Telegram. 

Governor,  Natal,  informs  me  that  he  has  repeated  to  you  his 
telegram  to  me  of  12th  January,  No.  1,  and  that  you  agree  to 
removal  of  about  25  native  chiefs  implicated  in  the  late  rebellion 
to  Mauritius  subject  to  my  approval.  It  is  most  desirable  that 
the  conditions  under  which  these  prisoners  will  be  detained  in 
Mauritius  should  be  as  lenient  as  is  compatible  with  their 
safe  detention,  and  less  rigorous  than  the  conditions  to 
which  ordinary  convicts  are  subjected,  and  I  presume  that 
there  will  be  no  difficulty  in  securing  to  them  such  excep- 
tional treatment  at  an  early  date  after  their  arrival  in  the 

Such  treatment  seems  to  me  proper  from  reasons  of  health, 
and  without  it  there  might  be  serious  difficulty  in  justifying 
action  of  His  Majesty's  Government  in  Parliament. 

No.  4.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  5.25  p.m.,  January  30,  1907.) 

January  30.  No.  1.  Ministers  beg  me  to  inform  you  that 
satisfactory  despatch  has  been  received  from  Governor,  Mauritius, 
as  to  taking  rebel  ringleaders  as  prisoners.  They  now  only 
await  approval  of  His  Majesty's  Government. — McCALLUM. 



No.  5.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  4.45  p.m.,  February  11,  1907.) 

February  11.  No.  1.  Referring  to  my  telegram  12th  January, 
Ministers  desire  me  to  press  for  immediate  reply,  as  the  matter 
is  one  of  great  urgency. — McCALLUM. 

No.  6.  The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor. 

(Sent  6  p.m.,  February  22,  1907- ) 

February  22.  No.  1.  Your  telegrams  llth  February,  No.  1, 
12th  January,  No.  1.  The  request  of  your  Ministers  that  the 
ringleaders  in  the  late  rebellion  to  the  number  of  about  25  should 
be  removed  to  Mauritius  under  the  provisions  of  the  Colonial 
Prisoners  Removal  Act  of  1884  and  their  urgent  representations 
that  this  step  is  expedient  for  their  safe  custody  and  is  in  the 
interests  of  the  peace  and  good  order  of  the  Colony  have  been 
carefully  considered  by  His  Majesty's  Government.  His 
Majesty's  Government  would  have  preferred  to  deal  with 
these  men  as  political  prisoners  under  a  special  Act.  In  view, 
however,  of  the  impossibility  of  legislation  without  a  special 
session  of  the  Natal  Parliament  and  of  the  urgency  of  the  matter, 
they  are  not  prepared  to  refuse  the  safeguard  of  deportation 
which  your  Ministers  so  strongly  represent  to  be  of  great  im- 
portance under  the  circumstances  of  the  case. 

They  take  note  of  your  Ministers'  observations  regarding  the 
effect  of  Section  3  of  the  Colonial  Prisoners  Removal  Act  and  it  will 
be  clearly  understood  that  under  this  pro  vision  the  prisoners,  or  any 
of  them,  may  be  returned  to  Natal  at  any  time  if  His  Majesty's 
Government  deem  it  expedient  or  necessary  on  grounds  of  health. 

In  the  meantime  I  am  in  communication  with  the  Governor  of 
Mauritius  in  regard  to  the  conditions  of  imprisonment  which 
may  be  suitable.  The  punishment  should  not  be  made  more 
severe  and,  in  the  opinion  of  His  Majesty's  Government,  the 
fact  of  banishment  justifies  such  amelioration  of  the  conditions 
as  is  consistent  with  safe  custody. — ELGIN. 

No.  7.  The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  6.35  p.m.,  February  24,  1907.) 
(Extract.)  Telegram. 

February  24.  No.  1.  Your  telegram  of  22nd  February,  No. 
1.  I  am  staying  with  High  Commissioner.  On  behalf  of 


Ministers  I  beg  to  thank  His  Majesty's  Government  very 
heartily  for  assistance  given  to  us.  It  will  have  far-reaching 
effect  and  will,  I  consider,  immensely  strengthen  our  position 
with  the  natives. — McCALLUM. 

No.  8.    The  Governor  of  Mauritius  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  2.5  p.m.,  February  25,  1907.) 

Cases  of  beri-beri  reported  to  me  yesterday,  five  in  Central 
Prison,  two  fatal ;  seventeen  in  Port  Louis  Prison.  Preventive 
measures  against  spread  of  disease  by  segregation  and  alteration 
in  diet  are  being  taken  and  inquiry  being  made  to  ascertain 
cause.  Further  report  will  follow. — BOYLE. 

No.  9.  The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor  of  Mauritius. 
(Sent  5.20  p.m.,  February  28,  1907.) 

I  have  informed  Governor,  Natal,  that  His  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment, though  they  would  have  preferred  that  the  ringleaders 
in  late  rebellion,  numbering  about  twenty-five,  should  have  been 
treated  as  political  prisoners,  will  not  refuse  to  agree  to  removal 
under  Prisoners  Removal  Act,  and  that  I  am  in  communication 
with  you  in  regard  to  conditions  of  imprisonment  which  may  be 

In  opinion  of  His  Majesty's  Government  fact  of  banishment 
justifies  such  amelioration  of  conditions  of  imprisonment  as  is 
consistent  with  safe  custody.  Please  telegraph,  after  consulting 
your  Attorney -General,  what  steps  you  propose  for  carrying  out 
views  of  His  Majesty's  Government. 

Please  also  furnish  me  with  your  opinion  as  to  whether  the 
outbreak  of  beri-beri  at  the  Central  Gaol,  reported  by  you  in 
your  telegram  of  25th  February,  can  be  confined  within  limits 
which  will  secure  the  immunity  of  the  Zulu  chiefs  who  are  to  be 
entrusted  to  your  care. — ELGIN. 

No.  10.          The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor. 
(Sent  2.10  p.m.,  March  2,  1907.) 

March  2.     No.  1.     It  may   be  well  to  let  you   know  that 
outbreak  of  beri-beri  has  just  been  reported  in  two  Mauritius 


prisons.  I  am  asking  Governor  of  Mauritius  whether  arrange- 
ments can  be  made  for  ensuring  immunity  for  Natal  ringleaders. 

No.  11.          The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor. 
(Sent  9.35  p.m.,  March  2,  1907.) 

March  2.  No.  2.  Your  telegram  of  24th  February,  No.  1. 
In  order  that  necessary  order  of  removal  may  be  prepared, 
please  telegraph  name  of  each  prisoner  to  be  removed,  date  of 
conviction,  Court  by  which  he  was  convicted,  place  at  which 
Court  was  held,  the  exact  description  of  the  crime  as  given  in 
the  record  of  proceedings  of  which  each  prisoner  was  convicted, 
term  of  sentence,  and  period  of  imprisonment  with  hard  labour 
or  penal  servitude  inflicted.  Confirmation  should  be  sent  by 
mail.  If  any  sentence  was  commuted  date  and  terms  of  com- 
mution  should  be  stated. — ELGIN. 

No.  12.          The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  12.45  a.m.,  March  5,  1907.) 

March  4.  No.  1.  Eef erring  to  your  telegram  of  2nd  March, 
No.  1,  matter  is  of  such  urgency  that  I  immediately  consulted 
Ministers,  from  whom  I  have  received  Minute  of  which  follow- 
ing is  purport : — 

"Much  regret  in  hearing  of  outbreak  especially  as 
rumours  of  unrest  are  becoming  daily  aggravated.  Imme- 
,  diate  deportation  of  ringleaders  would  probably  put  end 
to  this.  Rank  and  file  of  rebels  are  being  employed  on 
public  works  in  wood  and  iron  temporary  buildings  secured 
by  double-fenced  entanglement  enclosures,  such  as  used  for 
safe  custody  of  Boer  prisoners.  These  have  proved  healthy 
and  satisfactory  and  Ministers  would  like  the  same  provided 
forthwith  at  Mauritius  at  cost  of  Government  of  Natal  till 
the  gaols  are  immune  from  beri-beri." 

Whilst  discouraging  credence  of  rumours  and  reports  received 
I  cannot  help  feeling  uneasy,  and  shall  be  glad  if  Ministers' 
proposal  could  be  approved  by  you  and  deportation  of  ring- 
leaders take  place  with  least  possible  delay. 

In  the  meantime  I  have  called  for  returns  asked  for  in  your 
telegram  of  2nd  March,  No.  2. — MCCALLUM. 


No.  13.     The  Governor  of  Mauritius  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  5  p.m.,  March  6,  1907.) 
(Extract.)  Telegram. 

Your  Lordship's  telegram  of  the  28th  February,  with  regard 
to  beri-beri.  After  consultation  with  Chief  Medical  Officer  I 
cannot  guarantee  immunity  from  the  disease  for  any  person  in 
confinement  in  any  of  our  prisons  and  I  am  advised  that  no 
such  prison  can  safely  be  used  for  the  purpose. 

Governor  of  Natal  has  communicated  to  me  his  telegram  of 
4th  March  to  you  and  I  am  considering  whether  possibility  of 
making  special  arrangements  indicated  by  him,  but  as  I  am  by 
no  means  certain  that  this  is  feasible,  request  that  definite 
action  may  be  deferred  pending  receipt  of  my  further  report. — 

No.  14.          The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  9.10  p.m.,  March  9,  1907.) 

March  9.  No.  1.  Referring  to  your  telegram  of  2nd  March, 
No.  2,  following  are  25  names  of  prisoners  to  be  removed  and 
dates  of  conviction  : — 

1.  Unhlonhlo.— 4th  July. 

2.  Hlangakeza. — 25th  June. 

3.  Vava.— 25th  June. 

4.  Mbemi. — 2nd  August. 

5.  Nyamana. — 2nd  August. 

6.  Maragane. — 25th  June. 

7.  Ndabaningi. — 29th  June. 

8.  Ndondoza,— 29th  June. 

9.  Lunyana. — 10th  August. 

10.  Mabazwane. — 10th  August. 

11.  Yena. — 3rd  August. 

12.  Fokoti.— 14th  August. 

13.  Ndhlekeza.— 14th  August. 

14.  Siyongo. — 14th  August. 

15.  Mgadini. — 14th  August. 

16.  Macwaneka. — 31st  July. 

17.  Mcondo. — 31st  July. 

18.  Sikukuku.— 13th  August. 

19.  Tilonko.— 10th  July. 

20.  Ndhlovu.— 16th  July. 

21.  Messeni.— 16th  July. 

22.  Dede.— 28th  February. 


23.  Ntelezi.-  20th  March. 

24.  Mafinyongo  Qwabe. — 1 5th  August. 

25.  Goloza  Ximba. — 15th  August. 
All  the  above  being  dates  of  1906 

All  prisoners  had  convictions  by  Court  martial  at  following 
places  : — 

Nos.  1  to  6. — Grey  town. 

Nos.  7  to  17.— Nkandhla. 

Nos.  18  and  19. — Pietermaritzburg. 

Nos.  20  and  21. — Mapuraulo. 

No.  22.— Ixopo. 

No.  23. — Umtwalumi. 

Nos.  24  and  25.— Dundee. 

Description  of  crimes  : — 

Nos.  1  to  17. — Rebellion,  high  treason,  and  public  violence. 

Nos.  18  and  19. — Sedition,  public  violence. 

Nos.  20  and  21. — Murder,  rebellion,  high  treason,  public 


Nos.  22  and  23. — Sedition,  insurrection. 
Nos.  24  and  25. — High  treason,  public  violence. 

Terms  of  sentences  : — 

No.  1. — 20  years. 

Nos.  2,  3,  4.— 10  years,  30  lashes. 

Nos.  5,  6.— 10  years,  20  lashes. 

No.  7.— Death. 

No.  8.— 10  years. 

No.  9. — 15  years. 

No.  10.— 20  years. 

Nos.  11,  12.— Death. 

Nos.  13,  14,  15.— 15  years. 

No.  16.— Death. 

No.  17. — 10  years. 

Nos.  18,  19.— 10  years,  500  cattle. 

Nos.  20  to  23.— Death. 

No.  24.— 10  years,  40  lashes. 

No.  25.— 10  years,  30  lashes. 

.  Following  are  terms  and  dates  of  commutation  of  sentences  :— 

Nos.    7,    11,    12,   and    16.— Imprisonment    for  life  ;    12th 

Nos.  18, 19. — Fine  remitted  to  cattle  being  personal  property, 

not  exceeding  500  head  ;  17th  August. 
Nos.  20,  21. — Imprisonment  for  life  ;  17th  August. 


No.  22.— 10  years  and  fine  of   15   cattle   or   £100;    8th 

No.  23. — Imprisonment  for  15  years  and  25  lashes  ;   12th 


No.  24.— Lashes  reduced  to  30  ;  30th  August. 
No.  25. — Lashes  remitted  ;  30th  August. 

All  imprisonment  specified  above  being  with  hard  labour. 


No.  15. 

The  Governor  of  St.  Helena  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  12.19  p.m.,  March  19,  1907.) 


I  have  this  day  telegraphed  to  Governor,  Natal,  to  the  follow- 
ing effect  : — 

St.  Helena  willing  to  receive  Zulu  prisoners  provided  that 
War  Office  will  permit  use  of  part  of  barracks  as 
prison.  Cost  will  not  exceed  £20  per  man  per  annum. 

Please  ascertain  whether  War  Office  consents. — GALLWEY. 

No.  16.          The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  4.45  p.m.,  March  19,  1907.) 

March  19.  No.  1.  Referring  to  telegram  from  Governor, 
St.  Helena,  of  this  date  which  has  been  repeated  to  you, 
Ministers  are  quite  satisfied,  and  would  ask  you  to  fix  up  with 
Office  and  also  to  issue  orders  with  as  little  delay  as  possible. 
Until  the  eve  of  embarkation  action  will  be  kept  secret. — 


No.  17.          The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  1.20  p.m.,  April  3,  1907.) 
(Extract.)  Telegram. 

April  3.  The  situation  is  improving.  The  atmosphere  will 
be  much  cleared  by  transportation  of  ringleaders.  Ministers 
inquire  when  they  may  expect  your  authority  for  their  removal. 



No.  18.          The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  4.15  p.m.,  April  16,  1907.) 

April  16.     Referring  to  my  telegram  of  3rd  April,  I  have 
received  following  Minute  from  Ministers  : — 

Ministers  would  respectfully  urge  upon  the  Secretary  of 
State  necessity  for  giving  immediate  authority  for  the 
removal  to  Saint  Helena  of  the  native  ringleaders  con- 
cerned in  recent  rebellion.  It  is  now  over  three  months 
since  the  proposal  for  the  deportation  of  these  natives 
from  the  Colony  was  originally  made,  and  the  great  delay 
which  has  taken  place  through  unforeseen  circumstances 
has  been  unfortunate  and  embarrassing.  Ministers  depre- 
cate any  further  delay,  and  will  be  obliged  if  your 
Excellency  will  at  once  cable  to  the  Secretary  of  State 
urging  him  to  accelerate  settlement. 


No.  19. 

T/ie  Governor  of  St.  Helena  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  April  18,  1907.) 
The  Castle,  St.  Helena,  March  21,  1907. 

MY  LORD, — I  have  the  honour  to  inform  Your  Lordship  that 
I  received  a  telegraphic  despatch  from  the  Governor  of  Natal 
on  the  16th  instant  asking  me  whether  St.  Helena  would 
receive  twenty-five  rebel  ringleaders  sentenced  to  various  terms 
of  penal  servitude,  using  a  portion  of  empty  barracks  as  a 
prison ;  and,  if  so,  on  what  terms.  Sir  Henry  McCallum 
informed  me  that  owing  to  an  outbreak  of  beri-beri  in  the 
Mauritius  prisons  the  arrangement  made  to  send  the  prisoners 
to  that  Colony  had  fallen  through.  He  further  informed  me 
that  the  Mauritius  Government  had  agreed  to  take  the  twenty- 
five  prisoners  at  a  cost  of  £20  per  man  per  annum,  provided 
the  Natal  Government  sent  two  European  warders  with  the 

2.  I  discussed  the  matter  in  Council  on  the  18th  instant,  when 
it  was  unanimously  decided  to  receive  the  prisoners  provided 
the  War  Office  consented  to  the  use  of  Ladder  Hill  Barracks  as 
a  prison.  I  accordingly  telegraphed  to  this  effect  to  the 
Governor  of  Natal,  adding  that  the  cost  per  man  would  not 
exceed  £20  a  year,  but  that  the  Natal  Government  must  pay 
actual  cost.  I  made  this  latter  stipulation  as  this  Government 


has  no  wish  to  make  money  out  of  the  Natal  Government 
whilst  being  unable  to  risk  the  smallest  loss  under  the  transac- 
tion. I  am  writing  to  Sir  Henry  McCallum  fully  explaining 
matters.  My  despatch  should  reach  Pietermaritzburg  about  the 
4th  proximo,  and  so  allow  the  prisoners  to  be  sent  here  by  the 
steamer  due  to  leave  Cape  Town  on  or  about  the  29th  proximo. 

3.  On  the  19th  instant  I  telegraphed  to  Your  Lordship  giving 
you  the  drift  of  my  reply  to  the  Governor  of  Natal  and  request- 
ing Your  Lordship  would  ascertain  whether  the  "War  Office  would 
allow  the  use  of  part  of  the  barracks  as  a  prison.     My  object  in 
not  repeating  to  Your  Lordship  my  telegram  to  Natal  verbatim 
was  to  save  unnecessary  expense,  the  telegram  being  a  long  one. 

4.  The  actual  feeding  of  the  prisoners,  including  fuel,  will  not 
exceed   £10  a  year  per  man — consequently  the  traders  and 
farmers  will  benefit  only  to  a  very  small  extent.     Every  little 
helps,  however,  in  these  hard  times. 

I  have,  etc.  H.  L.  GALLWET, 

Governor  and  Commander-in-Chief. 

No.  20.  The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor. 

(Seat  5.30  p.m.,  April  20,  1907.) 

April  20.  No.  1.  Referring  to  your  telegram  9th  March, 
warrants  required  under  the  Colonial  Prisoners  Removal  Act, 
Section  6,  must  be  signed  by  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies 
and  by  Governor  of  St.  Helena  as  well  as  by  Governor  of  Natal 
before  prisoners  can  leave  Natal.  Warrants  will  be  forwarded 
to  Governor  of  St.  Helena  duly  signed  by  me  by  the  next  mail, 
which  leaves  on  3rd  May,  and  he  has  been  instructed  by 
telegraph  to  sign  them  and  forward  them  to  you  by  the  same 
steamer.  I  have  informed  your  Prime  Minister  accordingly. 
We  regret  the  delay  but  it  is  inevitable. 

The  War  Office  require  that  any  necessary  repairs  to  the 
barracks  and  other  expenditure  shall  be  met  by  the  Colony.  I 
presume  that  your  Ministers  agree  to  paying.  The  amount 
will  probably  be  small.  The  correspondence  will  be  sent  by 
next  mail. — ELGIN. 

No.  21.     The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor  of  St.  Helena. 
(Sent  5.45  p.m.,  April  20,  1907.) 

Referring  to  your  telegram  of  8th  April,  War  Office  agree  to 
use  of  barracks  on  conditions  which  I  have  accepted. 


Warrant  required  by  Section  6  of  the  Colonial  Prisoners 
Removal  Act  must  be  signed  by  Secretary  of  State  for  the 
Colonies  and  Governor  St.  Helena  as  well  as  Governor,  Natal, 
before  prisoners  can  be  removed  from  Natal.  I  am  therefore 
sending  out  to  you  by  mail  steamer  sailing  on  3rd  May  twenty  - 
five  warrants  signed  by  me.  You  should  make  arrangements 
to  sign  warrants  and  forward  them  to  Governor,  Natal,  by  the 
same  steamer.  Your  signature  is  sufficient  without  seal  or 
witness.  I  am  informing  Governor,  Natal,  by  telegraph. — 

No.  22.          The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  12.42  p.m.,  April  23,  1907.) 
(Extract.)  Telegram. 

April  23.  Your  telegram  of  20th  April,  No.  1.  Ministers 
now  understand  cause  of  delay.  They  are  prepared  to  pay  for 
repairs  to  barracks  and  other  incidental  expenses. — McCALLUM. 

No.  23.          The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor. 
(Sent  4.20  p.m.,  April  26,  1907., 

April  26.  No.  1.  Your  telegram  of  23rd  April.  I  assume 
that  your  Ministers  will  ascertain  from  Governor,  St.  Helena, 
what  guards  will  be  required  for  prisoners,  and  make  due 
provision  accordingly. — ELGIN. 

No.  24.          The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  12.13  p.m.,  April  27,  1907.) 

April  27.  No.  1.  Referring  to  your  telegram  of  26th  April, 
No.  1,  arrangements  with  respect  to  guards  already  made. 
Despatch  follows  by  mail  to-day. — MCCALLUM. 

No.  25.          The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  May  18,  1907.) 
Government  House,  Pietermaritzburg,  Natal, 

April  25,  1907. 

MY  LORD, — With  reference  to  previous  correspondence  on  the 
subject  of  the  deportation  from  this  Colony  of  native  rebel 


ringleaders,  I  have  the  honour  to  transmit  to  you  the  enclosed 
copy  of  a  despatch  which  I  have  received  from  the  Governor  of 
St.  Helena,  together  with  a  copy  of  the  reply  which  I  .have  sent 

3.  Ministers  desire  me  to  thank  your  Lordship  for  the 
support  you  have  given  them  in  this  important  matter. 

I  have,  etc.         HENRY  McCALLUM. 

Enclosure  1  in  No.  25. 
Governor,  St.  Helena,  to  Governor,  Natal. 

The  Castle,  St.  Helena,  March  22,  1907. 

SIR, — I  have  the  honour  to  inform  you  that  on  the  14th 
instant  I  received  a  telegram  from  Your  Excellency  which  I  was 
unable  to  decypher. 

2.  On  the  16th  March  Your  Excellency  repeated  your  telegram 
of  the  14th  instant,  which  was  to  the  effect  that  as  an  outbreak 
of  beri-beri  had  occurred  in  the  Mauritius  prisons,  an  arrange- 
ment to  send  twenty-five  rebel  ringleaders,  sentenced  to  various 
terms  of  penal  servitude,  to  that  Colony  had  fallen  through, 
Your   Excellency  wished   to  know  whether  this  Government 
would  receive  the  prisoners,  and,  if  so,  on  what  terms — suggest- 
ing that  part  of  the  empty  barracks  might  be  used  as  a  prison. 
Your  Excellency  further  informed  me  that  the  terms  under 
which    the   Mauritius  Government    had  agreed    to   take  the 
prisoners  was  at  the  rate  of  £20  per  man  per  annum,  provided 
Your  Government  sent  two  European  warders  with  the  men. 
You  also  stated  that  the  prisoners  were  a  docile  lot. 

3.  On  the  17th  instant,  in  reply  to  a  telegram  I  despatched 
to  Your  Excellency  the  previous  day,  you  informed  me  that  the 
following  was  the  prisoners'  diet : — 

Breakfast.— 12  ounces  mealie  meal. 

Supper. — 12  ounces  mealie  meal. 

Dinner. — 16  ounces  mealie  meal,  or  2  Ibs.  potatoes. 

Eight  ounces  fresh  meat  and  four  ounces  fresh  vegetables  twice 
a  week.  One  ounce  of  salt  daily.  Your  Excellency  further 
stated  that  if  mealies  were  not  obtainable  in  this  Colony  that 
you  would  send  supplies  thereof  periodically.  I  may  say  at 
once  that  mealies  are  obtainable  here.  I  take  it  that  the 
prisoners  themselves  make  the  meal. 

4.  On  the  19th  instant  I  sent  you  a  telegram  to  the  effect  that 
St.  Helena  was  willing  to  receive  the  prisoners  provided  the 
War  Office  consented  to  a  portion  of  the  empty  barracks  being 
used  as  a  prison.     That  the  cost  per  head  would  not  exceed  £20 
per  annum,  but  that  Your  Excellency's  Government  should  pay 


actual  cost.  I  made  this  stipulation  as  tins  Colony  has  no  wish 
to  make  money  out  of  the  Natal  Government  whilst,  owing  to 
its  slender  finances,  it  cannot  take  any  risk  of  loss.  I  further 
informed  Your  Excellency  that  a  despatch  explaining  matters 
would  reach  you  about  the  4th  proximo,  and  so  allow  the 
prisoners  being  sent  here  by  the  steamer  due  to  leave  Cape 
Town  about  the  29th  proximo.  I  ended  my  telegram  by 
stating  that  I  was  repeating  it  to  the  Secretary  of  State  for 
the  Colonies. 

5.  On  the  same  date  I  telegraphed  the  drift  of  my  reply  to 
you  to  Lord  Elgin,  and  requested  His  Lordship  to  ascertain 
whether  the  War  Office  would  consent  to  the  barracks  being 
used  as  a  prison. 

6.  As  regards  the  cost  of  feeding  the  prisoners,  I  calculate 
that  according  to  the  diet  laid  down  by  Your  Excellency  this 
will  not  exceed  £10  per  man  per  annum,  including  fuel.     The 
cost  of  feeding  a  prisoner  in  the  gaol  here  is  roughly,  including 
fuel,  Is.  a  day.      The  diet,  allowed,  however,  is  quite  different 
to  the  scale  laid  down  for  your  prisoners.     I  take  it  that  the 
two  European  warders  will  find  themselves  in  everything  but 
quarters,  and  the  usual  barrack  furniture. 

7.  I  am  not  aware  as  to  what  furniture,  if  any,  is  required  for 
the  prisoners.     There  is  a  large  swimming  bath  close  by  to 
where  they  will   be   confined  with   a   continual   flow  of  water 
passing  through.     I  presume  the  prisoners  do  their  own  cook- 
ing.    Should  cooking  and  eating  utensils  and  bedding  be  pur- 
chased ?     I  must  apologise  for  troubling  Your  Excellency  with 
questions  of  these  minor  details,  but  I  have  no  knowledge  of 
the  Zulu  nor  the  way  he  is  treated  when  a  prisoner. 

8.  There  will  be  certain  small  preliminary  expenses  to  be  met 
by  your  Government,  such  as  cost  of  landing  the  prisoners, 
purchase  of  washing  tubs,  weighing  machine,  buckets,  lamps, 
etc.     The  chief  recurrent  expenditure  as  apart  from  the  cost  of 
provisions  and  fuel  would  be  : — 

(a.)  Medical  attendance  and  cost  of  drugs.  There  is  only  one 
doctor  in  the  Colony  (the  Colonial  Surgeon),  who  is  already 
fully  occupied  in  tending  to  the  wants  of  the  entire  popula- 
tion of  the  Island.  It  is  only  reasonable  to  expect  that  he 
should  receive  some  remuneration  for  his  attendance  on  the 
prisoners  and  warders.  It  is  taken  for  granted  that  the 
warders  will  either  not  bring  their  families  with  them  or 
are  unmarried.  I  would  suggest,  for  Your  Excellency's 
consideration,  that  £50  a  year  would  be  a  reasonable  allow- 
ance to  the  Colonial  Surgeon.  Drugs  would  be  paid  for  as 
used,  and  would  probably  cost  very  little  during  the  year. 
If  a  prisoner  was  admitted  to  hospital,  the  usual  charge  of 


Is.  a  day  would  be  made.  This  would,  however,  be  only 
resorted  to  in  a  case  of  very  serious  illness,  as  there  is 
plenty  of  room  in  the  barracks  to  provide  for  a  sick  ward. 
I  would  add  that  the  barracks  it  is  proposed  to  use  stand 
clear  of  Jamestown  at  a  height  of  600  feet  above  the  sea. 
They  are  consequently  some  distance  from  the  scene  of  the 
Colonial  Surgeon's  official  duties.  This  official,  too,  would 
have  to  give  careful  attention  to  the  sanitary  state  of  the 
prisoners'  quarters. 

(6.)  I  do  not  know  how  many  warders  will  be  required  in 
addition  to  the  two  sent  by  you.  I  can  engage  suitable 
men  for  this  work  at  3s.  each  a  day  to  cover  everything. 

(c.)  Water  rate.  The  water  supply  at  Ladder  Hill  Barracks 
is  a  very  good  one,  and  extends  to  the  closet  system. 
Careful  supervision  is  necessary  to  maintain  the  supply  in 
a  satisfactory  state,  and  I  propose  calculating  the  water 
rate  at  roughly  3s.  per  man  per  annum  for  27  men. 

9.  Your  Excellency  will  see  that  £20  per  man  a  year  should 
more  than  cover  the  recurrent  expenditure  necessary  to  keep 
the    prisoners.      We    have    the    following    items    with    their 
approximate  cost  per  annum:  — 

Food  and  fuel £250 

Medical  attendance  ------  50 

Medicines                            v  6 

Three  warders  at  £55 165 

Oil,  wick,  and  matches      -----  5 

Soap  and  cleaning  materials     -  5 

Water  rate 4 

Contingencies  -------  5 

Total  -      £490 

I  have  allowed  for  three  extra  warders  as  there  will  have  to  be 
a  man  continually  on  duty  day  and  night,  owing  to  the  nature 
of  the  buildings  in  which  the  prisoners  will  be  confined.  This 
Government  can  lend  rifles  for  the  warders'  use  if  necessary.  I 
take  it  that  the  prisoners  do  not  receive  anything  in  the  way  of 
tea,  coffee,  or  other  groceries  with  the  exception  of  salt  ?  I  ask 
this  question  as  the  Zulus  who  were  interned  in  this  Colony  ten 
years  ago  received  coffee,  sugar,  and  other  groceries.  In  fact, 
they  appear  to  have  been  given  anything  they  asked  for. 

10.  I   would   be   much   obliged   if   Your   Excellency   would 
inform  me  when  I  may  expect  the  prisoners  and  enlighten  me 
as  to  the  several  points  raised  above.     I  would  mention   that 
there  are  no  iron  bars  to  the  windows  where  the  prisoners  will 
be  confined.     These,  however,  could  be  furnished   and    fixed 


locally  if  necessary,  the  cost  being  defrayed  by  your  Govern- 
ment. There  will  be  no  objection,  I  suppose,  to  placing  three 
or  four  men  in  one  room  ?  I  would  add  that  there  is  plenty  of 
room  for  the  prisoners  to  take  exercise.  I  should  like  to  be 
informed  what  work  the  prisoners  should  do.  Can  they  be  used 
on  the  roads,  or  should  they  not  leave  the  confines  of  the  prison 
yard  ? 

11.  In  conclusion  I  would  state  that  any  monies  expended  on 
the  maintenance  of  the  prisoners  will  be  treated  as  an  advance 
to  Your  Excellency's  Government,  and  be  adjusted  in  the  usual 
manner  through  the  Crown  Agents  for  the  Colonies. 

I  have,  etc.,        H.  L.  GALLWEY, 
Governor  and  Commander-in-Chief. 
His  Excellency 

Sir  Henry  E.  McCallum,  R.E.,  G.C.M.G.,  A.D.C., 
Governor  of  Natal,  Pietermaritzburg. 

Enclosure  2  in  No.  25. 
Governor,  Natal,  to  Governor,  St.  Helena. 

Government  House,  Natal,  April  21,  1907. 

SIR, — With  reference  to  your  despatch  of  the  22nd  ultimo.  I 
have  the  honour  to  transmit  to  you  the  enclosed  copy  of  a 
minute  which  I  have  received  from  the  Acting  Prime  Minister 
dealing  with  the  points  raised  by  you. 

I  would  further  confirm  my  telegram  to  you,  No.  1,  of  to-day's 
date,  wherein  I  state  that  I  have  been  informed  by  the  Secretary 
of  State  that  it  will  not  be  possible  to  move  the  prisoners  from 
Natal  until  about  the  end  of  May.  Lord  Elgin  informs  me  that 
he  has  sent  you  for  signature  the  warrants  required  under 
Section  6  of  the  Colonial  Prisoners'  Removal  Act,  with  a  request 
that  you  will  sign  and  forward  them  to  me  by  the  same  steamer. 
In  this  connection  I  should  feel  obliged  if,  when  despatching  the 
warrants,  you  will  give  directions  that  they  be  forwarded  from 
Cape  Town  overland,  as  this  will  avoid  a  delay  of  three  or 
four  days. 

Ministers  propose  to  send  the  prisoners  under  special  arrange- 
ment by  direct  steamer  from  Durban,  and  as  soon  as  the  details 
are  settled  I  will  apprise  you  by  telegram  of  the  date  of  their 
departure,  and  the  probable  date  of  their  arrival  at  St.  Helena. 

In  conclusion,  I  would  express  to  you  the  warm  thanks  of 
my  Ministers  and  myself  for  the  assistance  you  have  afforded 
us  in  this  matter. 

I  have,  etc.,  HENRY  MCCALLUM, 

His  Excellency  The  Governor,  etc.,  etc.,  etc., 
St.  Helena. 


Acting  Prime  Minister  to  Governor. 

His  EXCELLENCY, — 1.  In  reply  to  the  points  raised  in  His 
Excellency  the  Governor  of  St.  Helena's  despatch,  dated  the 
the  22nd  ultimo,  Ministers  will  be  obliged  if  Your  Excellency 
will  inform  Lieutenant-Colonel  Gallwey  as  follows : — The 
queries  in  the  despatch  are  dealt  with  seriatim  : — 

Paragraph  6. — The  two  European  warders  will  either  find 
themselves  in  all  necessaries  after  arrival  (except  quarters  and 
the  usual  barrack  furniture,  which  will  be  provided)  or  arrange- 
ments in  regard  thereto  will  be  made  later  on  with  the 
Government  of  St.  Helena. 

Paragraph  7. — As  the  natives  sleep  on  the  ground,  no  furni- 
ture will  be  required. 

They  will  do  their  own  cooking. 

Cooking  and  eating  utensils  the  prisoners  will  take  with 
them  ;  also  blankets,  which  form  the  only  bedding  required. 

Paragraph  8. — Government  is  prepared  to  meet  the  small 
preliminary  expenses  referred  to,  and 

(a)  In  regard  to  medical  attendance  and  cost  of  drugs,  the 
remuneration  to  the  doctor  suggested,  viz.,  £50,  is  agreed 
to  ;  drugs  will  also  be  paid  for  as  used. 

The  proposed  hospital  charge  of  Is.  per  day  is  accepted. 
The  warders  will  not  be  accompanied  by  families. 

(6)  Ministers  are  of  opinion  that  extra  warders  beyond  those 
provided  for  in  paragraph  9  will  not  be  required,  but 
liberty  is  left  to  the  Governor  of  St.  Helena  to  provide' 
additional  warders  on  such  special  occasions  as  it  may 
appear  to  His  Excellency  to  be  desirable  to  do  so. 

(c)  The  water  rate  of  3s.  per  man  per  annum  is  agreed  to. 

Paragraph  9. — Ministers  consider  the  estimated  cost  of  £490 
per  annum  is  reasonable,  and  if  three  extra  warders  are  neces- 
sary for  day  and  night  duty  at  the  prison  buildings,  Government 
agrees  to  their  employment  at  the  rate  of  £55  each  per  annum, 
as  provided  for  in  the  £490  before  mentioned. 

Ministers  are  obliged  for  the  information  that  rifles  will  be 
lent  to  the  warders  if  found  to  be  necessary. 

No  other  groceries  except  salt  are  received  by  the  prisoners. 

Paragraph  10. — Ministers  note  from  the  subsequent  despatch 
from  the  Governor  of  St.  Helena,  dated  25th  March,  that  it  will 
not  be  necessary  to  incur  any  expenditure  in  regard  to  fixing 
iron  bars  to  the  windows  of  the  buildings  where  the  prisoners 
will  be  confined,  as  rooms  with  windows  already  so  fitted  are 
available  if  required. 


There  will  be  no  objection  to  placing  three  or  four  men  in  one 

In  the  matter  of  work  the  prisoners  may  be  employed  on 
sweeping,  scrubbing,  cooking,  weeding,  road  maintenance,  and 
other  forms  of  light  labour. 

Paragraph  11. — Ministers  concur  in  any  moneys  expended  in 
the  maintenance  of  the  prisoners  being  treated  as  an  advance 
to  this  Government,  and  the  amount  being  adjusted  in  the  usual 
manner,  through  the  Crown  Agents  for  the  Colonies. 


April  8,  1907.  Acting  Prime  Minister. 

No.  26.          The  Governor  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  7  p.m.,  June  1,  1907.) 

June  1.  No.  1.  Rebel  ringleaders  left  Natal  to-day  by 
steamship  "  Inyati,"  which  proceeds  direct  to  St.  Helena. 

I  have  requested  Ministers  consider  in  a  month's  time 
desirability  of  releasing  on  ticket-of-leave,  rank  and  file  ordi- 
nary rebels  in  such  batches  at  one  time  as  can  be  dealt  with  by 
Administration.  Any  move  in  that  direction  before  then  would 
be  attributed  by  natives  to  Dinizulu's  visit  to  Pietermaritzburg, 
which  is  undesirable. 

I  hold  meeting  Monday  of  important  native  Chiefs  who  have 
come  to  take  leave  of  me,  including  Manzolwandhle,  Umciteki, 
'  who  is  Regent  of  Amandhlakazi  tribe  in  Usibepu's  place,  and 
Kambi,  who  is  Dinizulu's  cousin. 

I  believe  that  recommendations  of  the  Native  Affairs  Com- 
mission with  respect  to  removal  of  bond-fide  grievances  will  be 
adopted  and  that  I  am  leaving  Colony  with  native  matters 
fairly  flattened  out. — McCALLUM. 


EXEECISE  No.  6. 


No.  1.  Daily  Mail,  March  15,  1907. 


(From  Our  Own  Correspondent.) 

Nairobi,  Thursday,  March  14. 

In  consequence  of  their  having  insulted  white  women  and 
gone  unpunished  by  the  authorities,  three  negroes  have  been 
publicly  flogged  in  front  of  Nairobi  Court  House,  in  the  presence 
of  a  large  crowd,  by  Captain  Grogan,  president  of  the  Colonists' 

(From  Our  Own  Correspondent.) 

Mombasa,  Thursday,  March  14. 

Owing  to  sudden  unrest  among  the  natives  at  Nairobi,  the 
citizens  have  demanded  ammunition  and  rifles.  The  Acting 
Commissioner  has  agreed  to  issue  them,  and  has  appointed  a 
defence  committee. 

The  climax  has  been  reached,  it  is  considered,  owing  to  the 
Government's  refusal  to  appoint  white  police  some  time  ago. 

Nairobi  has  a  population  of  about  8,000,  of  whom  600  are 
Europeans  and  Eurasians.  The  East  Africa  Protectorate  has  a 
total  population  of  4,000,000,  of  whom  only  2,000  are  European 
or  Eurasian. 

White  police  are  to  be  introduced  in  Nairobi  on  April  1,  but 
the  Colonists  have  been  agitating  for  their  immediate  appoint- 
ment for  some  months  past. 

No.  2.     The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  A  cting  Commissioner. 
(Sent  1.15  p.m.,  March  15,  1907.) 

March  15.  According  to  telegrams  from  Nairobi  appearing 
in  Daily  Mail,  three  negroes,  not  having  been  punished  by 
authorities  for  insult  to  white  women,  have  been  flogged  by 



Grogan  in  front  of  Court  House,  and  defence  committee  has 
been  formed,  and  you  have  agreed  to  issue  arms  to  settlers. 
Report  fully  on  matter  by  telegram. — ELGIN. 

No.  3.     The  Acting  Commissioner  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  5.25  p.m.,  March  16,  1907- ) 

No.  36.  With  reference  to  your  telegram  of  March  15,  there 
is  absolutely  no  foundation  for  report  of  native  rising. 

On  Thursday  morning  Grogan,  Russell,  Bowker,  and  another 
flogged  three  Kikuyu  natives  in  front  of  the  Court  House, 
having  collected  upwards  of  100  Europeans,  of  whom  many  were 
armed,  as  supporters  and  witnesses.  They  disregarded  attempted 
intervention  by  European  police  officer  and  magistrate.  Natives 
were  alleged  to  have  insulted  two  European  ladies  whom  they 
were  pulling  in  rickshaw.  Details  very  vague,  but  insult  was 
apparently  not  of  a  serious  nature,  and  at  most  did  not  amount 
to  more  than  rudeness  and  disobedience.  Culprits  were  not  taken 
to  the  police,  but  were  taken  down  to  the  town  and  treated 
as  arrested.  Flogging  was  carried  out  in  a  most  brutal  manner. 
Majority  of  spectators  were  led  by  ringleaders  to  believe  that 
the  insults  offered  to  the  ladies  had  been  of  a  gross  nature. 

Immediately  after  the  flogging  Grogan  and  a  so-called  com- 
mittee of  about  30  persons  made  their  way  to  my  office  and 
formally  gave  me  his  version  of  the  occurrence,  of  which  I  was 
previously  in  complete  ignorance,  and  asserted  that  Europeans 
of  Nairobi  were  much  alarmed  at  the  prospect  of  a  native  rising, 
and  that  their  excitement  could  be  allayed  only  by  means  of 
self-protection  being  given  to  them  by  the  Government. 

In  order  to  calm  these  excited  and  hysterical  people  and  avert 
what  might  have  led  to  a  serious  fracas  in  the  town,  I  consented 
to  a  loan  of  ammunition  being  made  on  certain  conditions  to 
persons  whose  isolated  position  rendered  them  in  their  own 
opinion  insecure.  At  the  same  time  I  pointed  out  that  the 
Government  did  not  share  their  apprehension,  and  was,  in  fact, 
convinced  that  there  was  no  foundation  for  the  idea  of  a  native 
rising.  I  have  published  a  Notice  to  the  effect  in  to-day's 
Gazette.  Up  to  the  present  only  one  man  has  applied  for  any 

I  regard  the  whole  incident  as  deliberately  engineered  and 
planned  by  Grogan,  Burn,  Fichat,  Low  and  others  with  a  view 
to  bringing  the  Administration,  and  more  particularly  the 
Judicial  and  Police  Departments,  into  contempt,  and  I  consider 
the  matter  serious  in  view  of  the  fact  that  all  our  available 


forces  are  native  and  cannot  be  used  against  this  gang  of 
European  lawbreakers.  I  would  urge  the  immediate  appoint- 
ment of  the  European  police  force  asked  for  in  the  Estimates  if 
sanction  has  been  given. 

I  have  made  careful  inquiries  and  am  convinced  that  there  is 
absolutely  no  feeling  of  unrest  among  the  natives.  They  are 
perfectly  quiet  at  present.  Whether  they  will  remain  so  if 
incidents  like  that  of  Thursday  are  repeated  is  another  matter, 
but  personally  I  am  of  opinion  that  it  would  take  a  great  deal 
to  rouse  them.— JACKSON. 

No.  4.     The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Acting  Commissioner. 
(Sent  6.40  p.m.,  March  18,  1907.) 

March  18.  I  have  received  the  news  contained  in  your 
telegram,  No.  36,  with  regret.  I  presume  that  legal  proceedings 
have  been  taken  against  ringleaders. 

A  reduction  from  thirty  to  twenty  has  been  made  in  the 
strength  of  the  European  Police  Force  in  the  Estimates. 
Twenty  may  be  appointed  at  once. 

Will  the  force  which  you  will  then  have  be  sufficient  to  bring 
the  ringleaders  to  justice  ? — ELGIN. 

No.  5.     The  Acting  Commissioner  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  at  8.20  p.m.,  March  19,  1907.) 

No.  39.  I  hope  to  be  able  to  engage  twenty  constables  as 
sanctioned  in  your  telegram  of  to-day. 

Summonses  have  been  issued  against  Grogan,  Bowker, 
Bennett,  Fichat,  Burn,  Low,  and  others  for  holding  an  unlawful 
meeting,  and  Grogan  and  Bowker  will  be  charged  with  resisting 
the  police.  Case  will  be  heard  March  25th.  If  committed  to 
Sessions  they  will  be  tried  about  April  5th,  on  which  day 
flagship  arrives. 

I  am  considering  the  question  of  selecting  Mombasa  as  the 
place  of  trial,  as  it  may  be  impossible  to  obtain  an  unbiassed 
jury  here.  Should  accused  refuse  to  proceed  to  Mombasa  I 
shall  attempt  to  raise  force  of  special  constables.  I  have  warned 
Admiral  that  I  may  require  assistance.  May  I  detain  ship  of 
war  if  necessary  ? 

It  is  stated  that  over  100  settlers  have  sworn  to  release 
Grogan  if  he  is  sentenced  to  imprisonment. 


Natives  report  slight  unrest  in  Kikuyu  due  to  Grogan's- 
action  and  to  rumoured  threat  which  has  reached  them  that 
the  white  men  intend  to  kill  them. — JACKSON. 

No.  6.     The  Acting  Commissioner  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  2.32  p.m.,  April  19,  1907.) 

No.  58.  My  telegram,  No.  36,  of  the  16th  of  March.  Con- 
siderable capital  is  being  made  by  the  local  Press  and  the 
Colonists'  Association  out  of  the  statement  made  by  Your 
Lordship  in  the  House  of  Lords  that  many  of  the  participators 
in  the  flogging  incident  were  armed,  because  this  was  not 
proved  at  the  trial. 

Reports  received  at  the  time  justified  the  statement  in  my 
telegram.  As,  however,  evidence  could  only  be  procured  against 
Bowker  and  Grogan,  the  charges  under  the  144th  Section  of  the 
Indian  Penal  Code  were  not  proceeded  with.— JACKSON. 

No.  7.     The  Acting  Commissioner  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  2.44  p.m.,  April  23,  1907.) 

No.  62.  Have  been  asked  to  forward  following.  Charges  in 
connection  with  transmission  have  been  paid  : — 

Colonists'  Association  of  British  East  Africa  contends  that 
local  Administration  turned  flogging  incident  into  most 
unscrupulous  political  prosecution.  Your  Lordship's  state- 
ment in  House  Lords  of  April  llth,  as  reported  reference  a 
hundred  Europeans,  many  of  whom  were  armed,  an  un- 
witting but  gross  libel  on  this  community  at  large,  and  we 
request  that  Board  of  Enquiry  be  appointed  from  home  to 
enquire  into  this  and  other  pressing  grievances. 

No.  8.     The  Acting  Commissioner  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 

(Received  April  30,  1907.) 

Commissioner's  Office,  Nairobi,  April  9,  1907. 
MY  LORD, — I  have  the  honour  to  transmit  herewith  a  copy  of 
the  file  and  judgment  in  the  case  of  The  Crown  versus  Grogan 
and  others,  which  terminated  on  the  2nd  instant. 

2.  The  sentences  were  quietly  received  and  the  prisoners 
offered  no  resistance.  Later  in  the  day,  however,  a  mass 
meeting  was  held  and  telegrams  were  in  consequence  despatched 


to  Your  Lordship  and  to  the  Premiers  of  the  various  South 
African  Colonies. 

3.  A  deputation  also  waited  upon  me  to  ask  that  the  prisoners 
might  be  incarcerated  in  a  place  where  their  disgrace  might  not 
be  witnessed  by  native  convicts. 

4.  In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  gaol  has  been  medically  con- 
demned as   insanitary  for   Europeans,   and   is,   besides,   very 
ill-fitted  for  their  accommodation,  I  acceded  to  the  request  of 
the  deputation,  and  ordered  the  transfer  of  the  prisoners  to  a 
building  on  Nairobi  Hill,  where  they  are  confined  under  the 
surveillance  of  the  police. 

5.  I  was  somewhat  reluctant  to  do  this,  as  the  moral  effect 
would,  I  consider,  have  been  greater  if  the  sentence  had  been 
carried  out  in  the  regular  prison,  but,  having  regard  to  the 
strictures  passed  on  the  Mombasa  jail  in  the  Wehner  case,  I 
thought  it  better  not  to  give  any  opportunity  for  adverse 
criticism.     I   trust,  however,  that   ere  long  we   shall   have   a 
building  in  which  malefactors  of  every  kind  can  be  confined, 
irrespective  of  race  and  colour. 

6.  The  sentences,  which  in  view  of  the  gravity  of  the  offences 
committed  cannot  be  reasonably  regarded  as  other  than  lenient, 
have,  nevertheless,  provoked  a  considerable  amount  of  vitupera- 
tion in  the  local  press,  as  an  instance  of  which  I  have  the  honour 
to   enclose   a   copy  of   the    Times   of  East   Africa   of    the   6th 
instant.     Such  expressions  of  opinion  are  only  to  be  expected 
from  the  persons  who  are  known  to  be  the  authors  of  them. 

7.  The  trial  and  its  result  have,  as  far  as  I  am  aware,  pro- 
duced no  effect  whatever  on  the  native  mind,  which  is  far  too 
unintelligent  and  ignorant  to  take  any  interest  in  such  pro- 
ceedings, unless  their  scope  and  meaning  were  very  carefully 

8.  It  is  at  any  rate  certain  that  the  knowledge  that  they  can 
only  be  punished  in  accordance  with  law  is  unlikely  to  have  a 
disquieting  effect  on  the  Kikuyu.     If  they  were  led  to  under- 
stand that  they  could  be  flogged  by  Europeans  whenever  the 
latter  thought  fit  it  certainly  might  disturb  their  tranquillity. 

I  have,  etc.,  F.  J.  JACKSON, 

Acting  Commissioner. 

Enclosure  1  in  No.  8. 
Crown  versus  Grogan,  Bowker,   Wilson,  Burn,  Low,  Fichat, 

Gray,  Bennett,  and  Walker  Dun. 
Town  Magistrate,  Nairobi,  March  25,  1907. 

Parties  present :  Combe,  for  Crown  ;  Allen,  for  Grogan  ;  rest 


Combe  opens.  Asks  permission  to  withdraw  case  against 
Walker  Dun,  M'Clellan  Wilson,  and  Bennett. 

Walker  Dun,  M'Clellan  Wilson,  and  Bennett  discharged 

H.    O.    DOLBEY. 

EWAN  REGINALD  LOGAN,  European,  Protectorate  Officer, 
Nairobi,  sworn,  states  : — 

I  am  Town  Magistrate  at  Nairobi. 

On  14th  March,  1907,  I  was  in  this  Court  building.  At  about 
10  o'clock  in  the  morning  I  arrived  at  this  Court,  and  went  to 
my  private  room.  Immediately  I  got  there  I  saw  through  my 
window  a  number  of  men  coming  towards  the  Court  from  the 
Government  Road.  They  were  Europeans,  and  came  into  the 
space  outside  the  Court,  and  walked  past  my  window,  and  came 
to  main  entrance  of  Court.  They  stopped  there.  At  that 
moment  Mr.  Ghandy  the  pleader  walked  past  my  window  quite 
close.  I  asked  him  what  the  matter  was  about.  In  conse- 
quence of  what  he  said  to  me,  and  from  what  I  heard  from  my 
clerk,  I  sent  my  clerk  (Nadirshaw)  to  find  out  what  the  matter 

He  presently  returned  without  information.  He  had  applied 
to  Mr.  Burn  for  information,  and  was  refused. 

In  consequence  of  what  information  I  did  get,  being  under 
the  impression  that  an  unlawful  proceeding  was  about  to  take 
place,  I  felt  it  my  duty  to  go  outside  and  protest  to  the  crowd 
against  what  was  being  done.  I  went  out  and  walked  to  the 
steps  leading  to  the  main  door  of  the  Court.  I  stood  on  the  top 
step  and  found  a  large  crowd  of  European  men  gathered  round 
the  foot  of  the  steps.  I  should  think  they  were  40  or  50, 
perhaps  more.  In  the  centre  of  the  crowd  there  was  an  open 
space  ;  lying  on  the  ground  in  this  open  space  I  saw  two  natives. 
One  of  these  natives,  the  one  nearest  me,  was  doubled  up  in  a 
heap,  the  other  was  lying  at  full  length.  Mr.  Bowker  (accused) 
was  bending  over  him.  By  Mr.  Bowker's  side  was  Captain 
Grogan  (accused).  I  called  to  Mr.  Bowker  and  said  :  "  Mr. 
Bowker.  what  are  you  doing?"  he  did  not  reply.  I  then  said, 
"  Gentlemen,  you  are  not  allowed  to  take  the  law  into  your  own 
hands.  Your  proper  course  is  to  make  a  complaint  to  the 
proper  authorities."  I  said  this  in  a  loud  voice,  so  that  everyone 
present  could  hear.  Grogan  then  said  to  me,  "  If  we  do,  what 
will  happen  ?"  or  words  to  that  effect.  "  Will  he  be  advised  not 
to  do  it  again  ? "  (I  imagine  he  was  referring  to  one  of  the 
natives  on  the  ground.)  I  replied,  "If  anything  is  proved 
against  them  I  imagine  it  will  be  something  more  severe  than 
that."  These  were,  I  think,  my  words.  Grogan  then  said, 


"What  will  he  get?"  I  replied,  "Without  knowing  what  the 
offence  is  I  can't  say  what  the  punishment  will  be."  That  was 
all  that  was  said. 

I  waited  a  minute  or  two  on  the  step,  and  then  seeing  that 
the  men  were  determined  to  do  what  they  intended,  I  walked 
away  back  to  my  room.  Shortly  after  this  I  heard  the  sounds 
of  blows  apparently  by  some  thick  thong  upon  the  bare  flesh. 
Shortly  after  this  I  saw  the  crowd  of  men  dispersing,  and  they 
went  away.  No  complaint  of  any  sort  or  kind  against  these 
natives  had  been  made  to  me  at  all.  I  was  completely  taken  by 
surprise  by  what  happened,  and  at  the  time  there  were  no  white 
police  present.  When  I  was  in  my  room,  after  leaving  the  crowd, 
or  before  they  dispersed,  Captain  Smith  (policeman)  arrived,  and 
whilst  the  crowd  were  dispersing,  Mr.  Tyssen  and  other  white 
police  arrived.  I  saw  Mr.  Low  (accused)  on  the  verandah  of 
the  Court  when  I  first  walked  to  the  steps.  I  also  saw  the 
accused,  Captain  Gray,  on  the  verandah  also.  They  were  form- 
ing part  of  the  crowd  which  had  come  up  on  the  verandah  near 
the  entrance.  The  crowd  quietly  dispersed  after  this  occurrence. 

Mr.  Allen  reserves  his  cross-examination. 

Cross-examined  by  Captain  Fichat : — 

Q.  Did  you  only  see  two  boys  ? — I  only  noticed  two  boys 
lying  on  the  ground. 

Q.  Would  you  be  surprised  to  hear  there  were  three  ? — No. 

Q.  Will  you  swear  that  you  addressed  the  crowd  when  you 
said,  "  Gentlemen,  you  are  not  allowed  to  take  the  law  into  your 
own  hands,"  and  that  you  did  not  address  Grogan  alone  ? — Yes, 
I  will  swear  it. 

Q.  Did  you  say  to  everyone,  "  I  am  the  Magistrate "  ?— No, 
everybody  knows  me. 

Q.  Did  you  order  the  crowd  to  disperse  ? — I  did  not  tell  them 
to  go  away. 

Q.  Did  you  tell  them  that  by  remaining  they  were  forming 
an  unlawful  assembly  ? — No. 

Q.  Did  you  send  for  the  police  ;  if  so,  white  or  black  ? — I  sent 
for  the  white  police. 

Q.  Is  this  building  commonly  known  as  the  Town  Hall  ? — I 
don't  know. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  Government  rent  this  from  the  Municipal 
Authorities  ? — I  do. 

No  more  questions. 

Mr.  Burn  reserved  his  cross-examination.  (Logan  continues 

Outside  the  Court,  close  to  the  main  entrance,  where  the 
crowd  was  standing,  there  is  a  large  notice  board  with  the 
words,  "Notices,  Town  Magistrate's  Court,"  printed  on  it  in 


large  letters.  Close  to  the  gate  where  the  crowd  entered  the 
compound  there  is  another  notice  board  with  the  words,  "  Town 
Magistrate's  Court,"  printed  in  large  letters  upon  it. 

Both  these  notices  were  in  the  positions  I  have  described  on 
the  14th  March,  1907. 

Fichat  cross-examines  (on  continued  statement)  : — 

O.  Are  there  not  two  entrances  to  the  so-called  compound? 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  large  notice  board  close  by  one  entrance 
with  the  words,  "  Municipal  Offices,  Nairobi,"  upon  it  ? — Yes, 
there  is.  such  a  board. 

No  more  questions  from  either  accused. 

H.  0.  DOLBEY. 

Read  over  and  found  correct. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

GEORGE  SMITH,  A.D.S.  Police,  Nairobi,  sworn,  states  : — 

About  10  o'clock  a.m.  the  14th  March,  1907,  I  came  to  the 
Town  Magistrate's  Court  building.  On  arriving  here  I  saw  a 
crowd  of  Europeans  grouped  round  the  steps  of  the  Court 
House  ;  they  were  in  a  semi-circle,  and  on  the  ground  in  the 
centre  I  saw  three  Wakikuyu  ;  they  were  bound.  I  saw  Grogan 
also  in  the  semi-circle,  also  Mr.  Bowker.  The  Town  Magistrate, 
Mr.  Logan,  was  standing  on  the  Court  steps  addressing  the 

I  heard  him  warn  them  about  the  consequences  of  taking  the 
law  into  their  own  hands,  but  I  don't  recollect  his  exact  words  ; 
I  do,  however,  remember  him  saying  that  there  were  proper 
authorities  to  take  a  complaint  before  or  words  to  that  effect. 

The  Magistrate  having  finished  his  remarks  went  to  his  office. 
I  followed  him.  I  had  a  conversation  with  him  there,  and  then 
returned.  I  pushed  my  way  through  the  crowd,  and  put  my 
hand  on  Captain  Grogan's  arm.  As  I  did  so  the  crowd  closed 
in  and  hustled  me  outside  the  circle. 

The  crowd  hustled  me,  and  one  of  them  who  hustled  was  the 
accused,  Mr.  Bowker.  I  was  in  uniform  at  the  time. 

After  I  was  hustled  out  of  the  crowd  Grogan  commenced  to 
flog  one  of  the  Wakikuyu.  I  saw  this  myself.  I  saw  it  was 
useless  my  remaining  any  longer,  and  so  I  left,  and  went  to  the 
Police  Office  and  returned  with  the  A.D.S.  of  Police  in  Charge 
at  Nairobi.  On  my  return  I  found  the  crowd  had  dispersed. 
In  the  crowd  I  also  saw  Captain  Gray,  but  none  of  the  other 
accused  beyond  those  mentioned.  I  should  say  there  were 
about  100  to  130  Europeans  present. 

(Allen  and  Burn  both  reserve  cross-examination.) 


Fichat  cross-examines  : — 

Q.  You  were  present  when  Mr.  Logan  was  speaking  ? — Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  salute  him  ? — Yes,  when  I  got  inside  the  semi- 

Q.  Did  Mr.  Logan  acknowledge  your  salute  ? — Not  that  I 
remember — he  was  addressing  the  crowd. 

Q.  How  long  did  Logan  speak  after  you  arrived  ? — About  a 

Q.  How  close  were  you  ? — About  a  yard  and  a  half  away. 

Q.  Was  he  speaking  generally  or  addressing  anyone  in  par- 
ticular?— As  far  as  I  understood  him,  he  was  addressing  his 
remarks  to  Grogan. 

Q.  Was  Logan  nervous  or  excited  ? — I  can't  say. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  him  say  in  a  loud  voice  "  Gentlemen,  you 
must  not  take  the  law  into  your  own  hands  ? " — Yes,  I  heard 

Q.  In  a  loud  voice  ? — Not  in  a  very  loud  voice,  but  quite 

Q.  Audible  to  you  ? — I  think  everybody  present  could  have 

Q.  Did  you  hear  Grogan's  replies  ? — Yes,  but  I  don't  remem- 
ber his  words. 

Q.  Where  were  you  standing  ? — I  was  standing  next  to 
Captain  Grogan. 

Q.  How  far  was  Captain  Grogun  from  the  verandah  ? — About 
two  yards  away. 

Q.  When  you  were  hustled  by  the  crowd  were  you  in  any 
way  ill-treated  ? — No,  the  crowd  closed  in  and  pushed  me  aside. 

Q.  Mr.  Bowker  may  have  been  pushed  on  to  you  by  the 
crowd? — Yes. 

Q.  When  this  happened  did  you  call  anyone  to  assist  you  in 
the  name  of  the  law  ? — No. 

Q.  Why  not  ?— I  don't  know. 

Q.  When  outside  the  crowd  did  you  write  down  the  names 
of  those  present  ? — No. 

Q.  In  fact  you  did  not  think  the  matter  very  serious  ? — I 
don't  admit  that. 

No  more  questions  from  either  accused. 

Read  over  and  found  correct, 

H.  O.  DOLBET. 

VICTOR  MARRA  NEWLAND,  Agent,  Nairobi,  European,  sworn, 
states  : — 

I  am  a  resident  in  Nairobi. 

On  14th  March  I  met  Fichat  (accused)  in  the  main  road 
of  this  town.  It  was  nearly  opposite  Mrs.  Elliott's  tea-rooms. 


This  would  be  about  9.30  a.m.  I  had  a  conversation  with  him. 
He  told  me  that  Grogan  was  going  to  flog  natives  publicly,  and 
asked  me  if  I  intended  to  be  present.  I  asked  him  the  reasons 
of  the  flogging,  and  he  told  me  that  natives  had  insulted  white 

I  asked  him  what  women,  and  I  understood  him  to  say  Mrs. 
Grogan  and  another  lady. 

I  then  asked  him  what  they  had  done  (meaning  the  natives). 

I  said,  "Certainly  I  will  be  present."  This  was,  to  iny 
recollection,  the  whole  of  the  conversation. 

After  this  I  went  down  to  my  office  and  told  my  clerks  what 
had  been  told  me,  and  told  them  to  witness  the  public  flogging 
also.  I  also  sent  my  native  boys  as  well. 

On  the  14th  I  was  a  member  of  the  crowd  that  assembled 
outside  the  Town  Magistrate's  Court.  I  attended  for  the  pur- 
pose of  taking  part  in  the  object  of  this  assembly.  At  that 
time  I  was  under  the  impression  that  a  serious  assault  had  been 
committed  by  these  boys,  otherwise  I  would  not  have  attended. 

I  saw  Grogan,  Bowker  and  Gray  in  the  crowd,  and  Fichat 
also,  but  before  the  flogging  took  place. 

I  saw  Fichat  later  on  in  the  day.  I  think  it  was  in  the 
"  Travellers'  Club."  I  spoke  to  him  in  discussing  this  flogging, 
and  he  said  he  thought  he  had  got  a  crowd  together  on  record 

I  saw  the  floggings.  There  were  three  natives,  and  Grogan, 
Bowker  and  Gray  each  flogged  one. 

Before  the  flogging  I  also  saw  and  spoke  to  Bowker.  He  was 
very  angry,  and  from  what  he  told  me  it  was  evident  that  he 
!was  under  the  impression  that  a  serious  assault  had  been 

Fichat  cross-examines : — 

Q.  Did  I  tell  you  that,  when  discussing  this  with  you  on 
March  14th,  about  four  months  ago  a  native  had  insulted 
a  female  member  of  my  family  ? — Yes,  you  said  that  this 
wasn't  the  first  time  an  act  of  this  sort  had  been  committed. 

Q.  Did  I  say  that  these  things  must  be  put  a  stop  to  as  they 
had  occurred  before  ? — Not  to  my  recollection. 

Q.  When  I  made,  as  you  say,  the  observation  about  the  record 
time  to  you  in  the  Travellers'  Club,  was  this  on  the  14th  March? 

Q.  You  were  present  at  the  flogging  ? — Yes,  from  commence- 
ment to  the  end. 

Q.  Did  you  see  Logan  ? — Yes. 

Q.  Did  *  you  hear  the  conversation  that  passed  between 
Captain  Grogan  and  Logan  ?— I  did,  but  not  all. 


Q.  Did  you  hear  Logan  address  anyone  else  ? — I  did  not. 

Q.  Where  were  you  standing  ? — About  10  yards  from  Logan. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  Logan  say  in  a  loud  voice,  "  Gentlemen,  you 
are  not  allowed  to  take  the  law  into  your  own  hands  ? " — I  did 

Q.  Did  you  hear  Grogan  say  in  reply  to  Logan  :  "  I  am 
beating  them  because  they  insulted  my  sister  and  another 
lady  "  ?— No.  I  heard  Grogan  say,  in  reply  to  Logan's  question 
of  why  was  he  beating  these  boys  :  "  Because  I  want  to." 

Q.  Did  you  hear  the  crowd  ordered  to  disperse  ? — No,  I  did 

Q.  You  did  not  see  me  present  when  the  flogging  was  taking 
place  ? — No. 

Low  cross-examines  : — 

Q.  Did  you  come  to  my  office  last  Friday  ? — Yes. 

Q.  Anyone  else  present  ? — Yes,  Fichat. 

Q.  You  came  to  my  office  to  get  me  to  publish  a  letter? — 

Q.  Did  I  hesitate  about  publishing  this  letter  ? — Yes. 

Q.  You  asked  me  to  do  so  as  you  were  labouring  under  a 
misapprehension  ? — Not  only  I  but  other  people. 

Q.  Did  you  say  that  you  were  present,  being  under  the 
impression  that  an  indecent  assault  had  been  committed  on 
women  ? — Yes. 

Q.  On  the  22nd  this  wrongful  impression  had  been  removed  ? — 

Q.  When  was  the  impression  removed  ? — On  the  previous 
day— the  21st. 

Q.  When  did  you  receive  a  summons  in  this  case  ? — I  don't 

Q.  When  did  the  police  approach  you  ? — Not  before  I  got  my 

Q.  Did  you  receive  your  summons  prior  to  your  changing 
your  opinion  ? — Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  approach  Grogan  or  did  he  approach  you  ? — I 
asked  him  to  come  round  to  my  office.  This  was  on  21st  March. 

Q.  What  occurred  ? — I  told  Grogan  what  had  been  told  me 
relative  to  the  cause  that  brought  me  to  the  assembly,  and  asked 
him  if  there  was  any  truth  in  it.  He  replied  that  there  was  no 
truth  in  it,  and  that  he  had  been  betrayed. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  fact  that  before  you  received  the  witness 
summons  that  you  expected  to  be  summoned  as  a  defendant  ? — 
Yes,  I  did. 

No  more  questions. 

Read  over  ;  correct.        H.  O.  DOLBEY. 


BETRAN  GRAY  ALLEN,  Solicitor,  Nairobi,  European,  sworn, 
states  : — 

I  ain  practising  in  Nairobi. 

On  14th  March  I  came  to  the  Court  Building — that  would  be 
about  5  or  10  minutes  past  ten.  There  were  many  Europeans 
standing  outside  the  Court — I  should  say  anything  from  175  to 
250  in  number.  I  had  come  across  from  my  office  to  the  Court 
House.  I  did  not  see  Mr.  Logan  then  or  at  any  time.  I 
saw  some  of  the  accused — Grogan,  Gray,  Low,  Burn,  Fichat  and 

Mr.  Burn  was  on  the  verandah  just  at  the  top  of  the  steps. 
There  were  many  others  in  the  verandah,  it  was  full.  I  asked 
Mr.  Burn  what  the  matter  was  all  about,  he  said  that  Captain 
Grogan  was  going  to  beat  some  natives  for  insulting  white 
women.  I  then  said,  "  What  about  the  Magistrate  and  the 
police,"  and  asked  if  Logan  was  not  in  his  room.  He  replied, 
"  What  can  they  do,  they've  got  neither  military  nor  white 
police  in  the  country,  how  can  they  stop  it?"  He  said,  "The 
Magistrate  came  out  a  minute  ago  and  made  some  ridiculous 
remark  about  the  proceedings  not  being  legal  ;  he's  gone  back 
again  to  his  chambers." 

I  said  that  I  was  afraid  there  would  be  some  trouble  over  this. 
He  said,  "  Yes,  there  is  bound  to  be,"  and  then  he  asked  me 
if  I  thought  the  Government  would  do  anything  or  take  any 
notice  of  it.  I  said,  "  I  thought  they  would  be  bound  to."  He 
said,  "  They  would  have  to  either  ignore  the  matter  altogether, 
in  which  case  it  would  be  an  absolute  admission  of  impotence,  or 
take  it  up,  in  which  case,  if  they  tried  to  arrest  anybody,  there 
would  be  the  biggest  row  there  ever  had  been  in  East  Africa." 
I  agreed  with  him. 

I  saw  Captain  Smith — he  was,  I  think,  standing  in  the  out- 
skirts of  the  crowd,  near  the  Magistrate's  chamber.  I  saw 
him  make  his  way  into  the  crowd  after  Grogan  had  finished 
speaking,  and  was  preparing  to  beat  the  natives.  I  saw  him 
get  to  the  inner  edge  of  the  circle.  I  saw  a  lot  of  people  when 
they  saw  him  coming  get  in  front  of  him  and  with  their  elbows 
bar  his  way,  and  this  prevented  him  getting  to  the  centre  of  the 

I  saw  the  floggings.  These  were  three  and  were  performed 
by  Grogan,  Bowker  and  Gray,  respectively.  Fichat  was  present 
when  the  flogging  took  place.  I  think  Burn  was  also  immediately 
behind  me  when  the  flogging  was  going  on.  Our  conversation 
terminated  about  half  a  minute  before  the  flogging  commenced. 
Later  I  had  a  conversation  with  Fichat.  This  was  immediately 
after  the  flogging  was  over.  I  asked  him  what  the  boys  had 
really  done.  He  said  Mrs.  Grogan  and,  he  thought,  Mrs. 


Bowker  were  going  home  in  their  rickshaw  to  Grogan's  house 
last  night,  and  these  boys  came  and  stopped  the  rickshaw 
and  had  pulled  the  ladies  out  of  the  rickshaw  and  insulted 

I  said  it  was  absolutely  incredible,  and  that  I  did  not  believe 
it,  and,  further,  said  that  if  insulting  white  women  was  going 
to  start  in  this  Protectorate  I  did  not  think  it  was  these  three 
poor  wretched  devils  who  would  start  it.  He  said  it  was 
perfectly  true,  and  that  this  sort  of  thing  must  be  stopped 
at  once.  He  said  that  this  was  not  the  first  time  such  things 
had  happened. 

I  said  to  him  that  these  floggings  would  create  a  big  row  at 
home,  and  he  replied  that  it  would  be  in  all  the  English  papers 
by  to-night  or  to-morrow  morning.  He  then  said  he  must  go 
and  send  off  a  cable  at  once.  I  said  I  thought  Low  (another 
accused)  would  do  that.  He  said  Low  might  send  one,  but  he 
had  to  send'one  also.  He  turned  away,  and  as  he  did  so  I  saw 
two  men  come  up  and  ask  him  what  the  boys  had  done,  there- 
upon I  heard  Fichat  begin  telling  the  same  story  to  them  as  he 
told  me. 

The  next  day  I  had  a  further  conversation  with  Burn.  We 
were  sitting  at  the  pleaders'  table  in  his  Court.  He  told  me 
that  he  and  a  lot  of  others  had  adjourned  to  T.  A.  Wood's 
premises  after  the  flogging  and  had  passed  a  resolution  (or 
resolutions,  I  forget  which).  As  a  result  of  this  resolution  I 
understood  him  to  say  that  they  had  gone  to  the  Acting  Com- 
missioner's house. 

He  said  the  meeting  that  had  gone  there  had  represented  to 
the  Acting  Commissioner  the  likelihood  of  a  native  rising  and 
that  he  (the  Acting  Commissioner)  had  promised  that  every 
white  man  who  asked  for  it  would  be  given  a  rifle  and 
200  rounds  of  ammunition.  This,  I  think,  was  all  that  passed 
between  us. 

On  March  14th  the  flogging  took  place  before  the  Court  sat, 
I  think.  I  came  into  Court  10  minutes  after  the  flogging  had 
finished  and  I  found  nobody  there  at  all.  The  Magistrate 
was  not  sitting. 

Examined  by  Combe  : — 

I  know  the  publisher  and  proprietor  of  this  paper.  (The 
Star  of  East  Africa  produced  and  put  in.)  The  publisher  is 
Low  (accused). 

Burn  cross-examines : — 

Q.  You  frequently  see  me  in  Court  ? — It  is  a  daily  occurrence. 

Q.  Where  I  told  you  that  Grogan  was  going  to  beat  some 
natives  there  were  a  number  of  people  outside  the  Court  ? — Yes. 


Q.  At  this  time  you  knew  as  much  as  I  did.  Why  did  you 
stop  1 — To  see  what  was  going  on. 

Q.  What  other  object  had  I  for  stopping.  I  did  not  do 
anything  more  than  you  did  ? — I  don't  know. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  fact  that  I  am  prosecuted  for  political 
motives? — I  don't  know,  but  I  heard  the  Crown  Advocate 
state  that  you  were  selected  as  being  a  ringleader. 

Q.  I  have  on  various  occasions  dared  to  criticise  the  Govern- 
ment ? — Yes. 

Q.  Can  you  give  any  reason,  other  than  a  political  one,  why  I 
should  be  in  the  dock  and  you  in  the  witness-box  ? — I  presume 
you  are  a  more  important  man. 

Q.  Did  I  discuss  this  matter  with  you  from  other  than  a 
spectator's  point  of  view? — Understood  you  to  take  a  greater 
interest  in  it  than  that. 

Q.  You  were  close  to  me  at  the  time  of  the  flogging  ? — Yes,  I 
believe  so. 

Q.  I  did  nothing  but  look  on  ? — No. 

Q.  Was  there  anything  illegal  in  the  conversation  that  passed 
(second  conversation)  ? — No,  I  don't  think  so. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  either  the  Magistrate  or  police  call  on 
anyone  for  aid  in  suppressing  this  assembly  ? — No. 

Q.  Would  you  have  given  aid  if  called  on  ? — No. 

Q.  As  a  member  of  an  unlawful  assembly — (Question  un- 
finished) ? — I  don't  admit  the  assembly  was  unlawful. 

Q.  Then  you  don't  think  there  was  anything  unlawful  in  the 
assembly  ? — I  couldn't  say  I  considered  it  a  lawful  assembly. 

Q.  How  was  I  armed  ? — I  saw  no  weapons  on  you. 

No  more  questions. 

Fichat  cross-examines : — 

Q.  Our  conversation  took  place  after  the  flogging  and  when 
the  crowd  was  dispersing  ? — Immediately  after  the  flogging. 

Q.  When  the  crowd  was  beginning  to  disperse  ? — Yes. 

Q.  During  the  past  12  months  there  has  been  certain  animus 
between  us  T — Not  on  my  side. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  I  am  the  representative  of  the  East 
African  Standard  1 — I  am. 

No  more  questions. 

Low  cross-examines  : — 

Q.  Where  was  I  standing  when  you  saw  me? — On  the 
verandah,  in  about  the  middle  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  see  me  taking  any  part  in  the  assembly  beyond 
looking  on  ? — No. 

No  further  questions  from  either  of  accused. 

Combe  re-examines  in  reply  to  questions  : — 

When  I  saw  Burn  at  the  assembly  I  thought  he  was  more 


than  a  spectator.     He  struck  me  as  being  there  approving  the 
proceedings  that  were  going  on.     I  formed  this  opinion  from 
what  he  (Burn)  said  and  from  his  manner. 
No  more  questions. 

Read  over  ;  correct.         H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

ARTHUR  DAWSON  MILNE,  Deputy  Principal  Medical  Officer, 
European,  sworn,  states  : — 

On  March  14th  I  met  Burn  shortly  before  10  a.m.  in  the . 
street  here.  It  would  be  just  this  side  of  the  bank.  He  was 
going  to  the  bank— that  would  be  away  from  the  Court.  There 
was  another  man  with  him.  I  stopped  to  speak  and  Mr.  Burn, 
who  stopped  also,  pulled  out  his  watch  and  at  the  same  time 
said,  "  I  must  not  miss  this."  I  asked  him  what  was  up.  He 
replied  that  Grogan  was  going  to  flog  his  gharri  boys  at  the 
Court  House  for  assaulting  Mrs.  Grogan.  He  then  corrected 
himself  and  said  at  least  for  a  technical  assault. 

Burn  cross-examines  : — 

Q.  Had  I  been  a  newspaper  correspondent  this  hurrying  of 
mine  would  have  been  a  very  natural  proceeding  ?— Yes. 

Q.  Are  you  surprised  to  hear  I  am  a  special  correspondent  for 
a  London  paper  1 — Not  in  the  least. 

Low  cross-examines  : — 

Q.  Did  you  see  either  a  Sub-Commissioner  or  Collector  of 
Uganda  present  at  the  assembly  ? — No. 

Combe  cross-examined  : — 

Q.  Were  you  present  at  the  assembly  ? — No. 

No  further  questions  from  either  accused. 

Read  over  ;  correct.         H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Zoroastrian,  sworn,  states  : — 

On  March  14th  I  was  in  the  Court  buildings.  I  saw  a  crowd 
coming  towards  the  Court  compound.  This  was  about  9.45  a.m. 
I  was  speaking  to  Logan  at  the  time  and  facing  the  window — I 
was  with  him  in  his  private  room. 

I  saw  Bowker,  McClellan  Wilson,  and  T.  A.  Wood,  and 
behind  Gray  and  Mr.  Standring  following.  I  drew  Logan's 
attention  to  it. 

Logan  then  spoke  to  Ghandy  and  then  wrote  a  note  to  Tyssen 
the  Assistant  District  Superintendent  of  Police  which  he  gave 
to  me.  I  handed  it  on  to  David,  the  Court  Interpreter,  for 
delivery.  Logan  gave  me  permission  to  go  outside  to  see  what 
the  Europeans  wanted.  I  came  to  the  steps  of  the  Court  and 
there  I  saw  Burn.  I  asked  him  if  these  gentlemen  wished  to 


see  Logan  on  any  urgent  business.  Burn  looked  round  and 
smiled,  but  he  did  not  give  me  any  answer.  I  addressed  the 
question  directly  to  Burn. 

I  then  returned  and  reported  the  matter  to  Logan.  Logan 
then  came  out  of  the  Chambers  and  I  got  on  my  bicycle  and 
rode  to  Tyssen's  office.  When  I  returned  the  crowd  had  dis- 
persed. Mr.  Burn  had  no  engagement  in  Court  that  morning. 
That  is  there  was  no  Court  case  in  which  he  was  engaged  on 
that  morning. 

Burn  cross-examines : — 

Q.  Did  you  not  ask  me  if  I  wanted  to  see  Logan  ?— As  far  as 
I  remember  I  did  not. 

Q.  Did  Logan  ask  for  me  to  go  and  see  him  after  you  told 
him  I  was  here  ? — No,  he  didn't  ask  for  you. 

No  more  questions  from  either  accused. 

By  Court :  Answers  : — 

I  asked  Mr.  Burn  what  the  assembly  was  about  because  I 
knew  him  best.  I  had  no  reason  to  suppose  he  knew  more 
about  this  assembly  than  anyone  else. 

Bead  over  ;  correct.         H.  O.  DOLBET. 

JOHN  ACLAND  LETHBRIDGE,  Livery  Stable-keeper,  European, 
resident  at  Nairobi,  sworn,  states  : — 

At  8.30  on  the  morning  of  14th  March  I  received  certain 
communications.  That  morning  I  saw  Captain  Fichat  near  his 
office  and  had  a  conversation  with  him.  This  was  before 
10  o'clock  a.m.  He  told  me  that  certain  ladies  had  been  grossly 
insulted  by  three  rickshaw  boys.  I  was  told  Mrs.  Grogan  was 
one  of  the  ladies,  I  think  it  was  Fichat  who  told  me. 

With  regard  to  the  insult  I  forget  Fichat's  exact  words,  but 
the  impression  he  left  in  my  mind  from  his  language  was  that 
they  had  been  grossly  insulted.  He  did  not  tell  me  how.  He 
said  that,  in  consequence,  Grogan  was  going  to  punish  them 
publicly.  I  witnessed  it.  I  saw  Smith  of  the  police,  he  was 
there.  He  came  from  the  balcony  and  down  the  Court  steps, 
but  I  don't  know  if  he  tried  to  get  to  Grogan.  I  saw  him 
moved  away,  by  whom  I  don't  know,  but  by  several  persons. 
I  cannot  identify  any  of  the  people  who  moved  him  away.  I 
witnessed  the  floggings — I  didn't  count,  the  strokes.  I  should 
think  about  25  strokes  each  were  given. 

There  was  no  violence  shown  to  Smith,  he  was  simply  hustled 

No  questions  from  either  accused. 

Read  over  ;  correct.         H.  O.  DOLBEY. 


EDWARD  LANCELOT  SANDERSON,  Town  Clerk,  Nairobi, 
European,  sworn,  states  :  — 

On  14th  March  I  met  Low  and  Fichat.  They  were  together, 
and  the  time  was  9.30  a.m.  I  met  them  close  to  Gailey  and 
Roberts'  office.  They  spoke  to  me  and  told  me  that  some 
natives  were  going  to  be  flogged.  I  can't  say  which  of  them 
told  me,  I  think  both.  Fichat  said  they  were  to  be  flogged  for 
insulting  a  white  lady.  I  understood  the  lady  was  Mrs.  Grogan 
and  that  there  was  another  lady. 

I  cannot  remember  the  exact  words.  I  expressed  surprise  at 
this  but  Fichat  corroborated  his  statement  by  giving  two 
instances  of  similar  bad  behaviour  toward  white  women  in 
Nairobi.  After  this  I  went  on  to  my  office.  I  witnessed  the 

I  saw  Captain  Smith  put  his  hand  on  Grogan's  shoulder 
before  the  flogging  took  place.  When  Smith  did  this  he  was 
crowded  out  of  the  ring. 

I  saw  Bowker,  Grogan  and  Gray  each  flog  a  native.  Having 
regard  to  what  I  had  heard,  I  did  not  consider  in  the  circum- 
stances it  was  a  severe  punishment.  I  could  not  identify 
anybody  of  those  who  were  crowding  (Smith  out  of  the  ring. 

Burn  cross-examines  :  — 

Q.  Were  there  people  about  besides  those  forming  the  ring 
on  the  ground  ?  —  Yes,  there  were  some  on  the  verandah  and 
many  on  the  top  of  the  steps  who  were  looking  on. 

No  more  questions. 

Low  cross-examines  :  — 

Q.  Do  you  think  both  of  us  told  you  that  floggings  were 
going  to  take  place  ?  —  Yes. 

Q.  Will  you  swear  that  Fichat  took  part  in  the  conversation  ? 
—  Yes. 

Q.  Will  you  swear  that  it  was  Fichat  and  not  I  who  told  you 
the  floggings  were  for  an  insult  to  a  white  lady  ?  —  I  think  it 
was  Fichat  who  told  me,  as  I  distinctly  remember  his  telling 
me  about  two  previous  instances  of  this  nature. 

Q.  Will  you  swear  that  the  word  "  assault  "  was  used  ?—  No, 
I  won't  swear  that. 

Q.  Was  not  the  word  used  "  insult  "  ?  —  No,  that  was  certainly 
not  the  description  of  the  affair. 

No  further  questions  from  either  accused. 

Read  over  ;  correct.        H.  O.  DOLBEY. 



GERTRUDE  EDITH  GROGAN,  married  woman,  European,  sworn, 
states : — 

I  am  the  wife  of  Captain  Grogan. 

On  the  morning  of  March  14th  Fichat  came  to  our  house. 
We  were  having  our  breakfast  at  the  time.  He  was  informed 
of  an  incident  that  occurred  with  regard  to  the  insolent  conduct 
of  three  of  my  gharri-boys  toward  Mrs.  Hunter,  who  is  my 
sister-in-law,  and  Miss  M'Donnell,  who  is  a  friend  of  ours.  He 
was  present  when  we  discussed  the  conduct  of  the  gharri-boys. 

When  Fichat  came  in  my  husband  and  I  were  present,  and 
we  three  discussed  the  affair  together. 

No  questidhs. 

Read  over  ;  correct.        H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Adjourn  till  to-morrow. 

EDWARD  STEVEN  HARGREAVES,  employed  in  Nairobi  Munici- 
pality, European,  sworn,  states : — 

On  March  14th  I  came  down  to  my  office.  When  there  I 
heard  that  a  disturbance  was  about  to  take  place.  I  arrived  at 
my  office  at  9.30  or  9.40  a.m. 

On  my  way  to  the  office  I  saw  several  people  outside  the 
Town  Magistrate's  Court. 

Later  on  I  saw  a  number  of  Europeans  arriving  there.  My 
office  abuts  the  Court  premises.  I  saw  Grogan  arrive  with 
three  natives,  bound.  Afterwards  I  heard  Logan  enquire  of 
Grogan  what  was  going  to  happen.  Grogan  replied  that  he 
was  going  to  beat  the  boys  for  insulting  his  sister  and  a  lady 
friend.  I  don't  remember  exactly  what  the  further  conversation 
was.  I  know  Smith.  I  saw  him  there.  I  saw  him  put  his 
hand  on  Grogan's  shoulder  after  the  conversation  between  Logan 
and  Grogan  had  taken  place  and  before  the  boys  were  flogged. 

The  next  thing  I  saw  was  that  Smith  was  outside  the  circle. 
I  can't  say  how  he  got  outside,  whether  he  was  pushed  outside 
or  how  otherwise.  I  did  not  see  the  boys  flogged.  I  saw  one 
of  them  tied  up.  Bowker  tied  him  up.  He  tied  the  boy's  arms 
to  his  legs.  I  was  standing  inside  the  Court  verandah  at  the  time. 

I  heard  no  mention  made  of  resistance  in  the  event  of  arrests 
being  made. 

No  questions  from  either  accused. 

Read  over  ;  correct.        H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

ARTHUR  FITZHERBERT  MACGEE,  Manager,  Travellers'  Club, 
Nairobi,  European,  sworn,  states : — 

I  saw  the  three  natives  flogged  outside  the  Court  on  14th  of 
this  month. 


I  came  up  to  the  Court  with  Grogan.  They  (the  natives) 
were  bound,  I  believe,  as  to  their  wrists.  I  saw  Logan.  I 
heard  him  tell  the  assembly  that  the  gathering  was  illegal,  or 
use  words  to  that  effect.  I  think  there  would  be  about  100 
people  present.  After  this  the  boys  were  thrashed.  I  saw 
Smith  there.  I  saw  him  go  up  to  Grogan  to  try  and  stop  it.  He 
was  pushed  back  by  the  crowd.  I  won't  swear  to  the  identity 
of  anyone  who  actually  pushed  him.  He  was  pushed  back  with 
the  object  of  preventing  him  interfering  any  further  with  Grogan. 

After  the  flogging  the  boys  were  cut  loose  ;  there  was  cheering 
on  the  part  of  crowd.  They  appeared  to  be  cheering  the  men 
who  had  done  the  flogging. 

I  heard  there  was  going  to  be  flogging  of  natives  for 
assaulting  white  women,  and  that  is  why  I  came.  There  was  a 
rumour  to  this  effect.  Neither  of  the  accused  told  me  anything 
about  the  matter. 

Low  cross-examines : — 

Q.  You  heard  cheering.  They  may  have  been  cheering  for 
the  King? — I  think  they  were  cheering  the  men  who  had  done 
the  flogging,  I  was. 

Fichat  cross-examines : — 

Q.  After  the  affair  was  over  did  you  hear  a  rumour  that  Mr. 
Ferrier  stood  with  a  rifle  against  the  Town  Magistrate's  chest? 
— No. 

Combe  re-examines : — 

Q.  If  you  had  heard  such  a  rumour  would  you  have  believed 
it? — If  informed  by  any  credible  witness  I  should  have 
believed  it. 

No  more  questions  from  either  accused. 

By  Court:— 

I  heard  no  other  rumour  regarding  the  reason  why  these 
natives  were  to  be  flogged  besides  the  one  to  the  effect  that  they 
have  assaulted  white  women. 

No  questions. 

Eead  over  ;  correct.        H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

DAVID  OWEN  ROBERTS,  European,  trader,  Nairobi,  sworn, 
states  :  — 

I  was  present  on  March  14th  when  three  natives  were  flogged 
outside  the  Court  House.  I  heard  they  were  to  be  flogged  for 
insulting  two  ladies. 

I  saw  Smith  in  the  crowd.  He  was  next  Grogan.  I  did  not 
see  him  removed.  I  heard  shouts  of  "  Leave  him  alone  ! " 
addressed  by  the  crowd  to  Smith.  I  understood  the  crowd 
were  telling  him  not  to  interfere  with  Bowker  or  Grogan.  The 
shouting  was  general.  I  heard  nothing  else  said. 


No  questions  from  either  accused. 

Read  over  ;  correct.        H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Prosecutor's  case. 

Combe  states  does  not  press  charge  of  rioting  or  for  being 

Burn  objects.  States  having  been  summoned  for  these 
offences  which  are  triable  by  Court  of  Sessions.  The  case  must 
necessarily  go  to  Sessions. 

Combe  replies.     Says  Burn's  argument  is  wrong  in  law. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

I  think  case  is  governed  by  Section  209,  Sub-section  1,  but  as 
Burn  asks  for  time  to  consult  and  produce  authorities,  adjourn 
till  2  p.m.  for  that  purpose.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Burn  quotes  Ramtahal  Singh  5,  W.R.  Code  65  (1866),  and 
Rupaga  Bom.  H.C.  Criminal  Rule,  No.  33  of  21st  May,  1888.  I 
hold  these  cases  have  no  bearing  on  the  point.  Emp.  V.  Parma- 
nand  13  C.L.R.  375  (S.C.)  appears  to  me  to  make  quite  clear  the 
meaning  of  Section  209,  Sub-section  1.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

The  accused  all  asked  if  they  wish  to  recall  any  of  the 
witnesses  for  the  prosecution  for  cross-examination. 

E.  R.  LOGAN  (re-called).  Cross-examined  by  Burn  in  reply  to 
questions,  answers  : — 

My  clerk  told  me  you  were  there,  he  did  not  say  in  the 

I  have  never  detected  you  in  any  unlawful  proceedings  before. 

I  think  you,  if  called  upon,  would  have  been  as  likely  as 
anybody  about  the  Court  on  14th  March  to  have  helped  to 
prevent  a  breach  of  the  peace. 

I  did  not  send  for  you  to  help  me  keep  the  peace,  because  I 
thought  you  were  taking  part  in  unlawful  assembly.  My  reason 
for  my  opinion  is  based  on  the  fact  of  your  being  present  at  the 

I  did  not  draw  up  a  list  of  names  of  those  present.  I  made  a 
report  which  I  submitted  for  the  Commissioner.  This  report 
gave  an  account  of  what  took  place.  I  cannot  give  the  names 
of  all  concerned.  I  don't  think  there  were  20  names  in  this 
report — yours,  I  think,  was  one.  One  reason  for  my  not  calling 
on  you  to  help  me  was  because  my  clerk  said  you  would  not 
give  him  any  information.  I  believed  the  assembly  to  be  an 
unlawful  assembly,  and  [  practically  told  them  so  by  saying 
that  they  were  behaving  illegally. 

No  more  questions  from  either  of  the  accused. 

Read  over  ;  correct.         H.  0.  DOLBEY. 


Captain  SMITH  (recalled),  cross-examined  by  Burn,  answers, 
in  reply  to  questions  : — 

I  did  not  call  on  anybody  present  to  aid  in  suppressing  a 
breach*  of  the  peace. 

I  was  present  when  Logan  was  speaking.  I  did  not  hear 
anybody  actually  say  the  words,  "  unlawful  assembly,"  or  tell 
them  to  disperse  in  those  very  words.  I  did  not  see  you 
myself.  There  were  a  number  of  people  on  the  verandah. 

None  of  the  accused  wish  to  ask  any  more  questions. 

Neither  of  the  accused  desire  to  have  any  of  the  witnesses 
back  for  the  purpose  of  cross-examination. 

Head  over  ;  correct.         H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

The  accused  are  called  on  to  produce  witnesses  for  their 
defence  or  on  their  behalf.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

W.  A.  BURN,  one  of  the  accused,  examined  by  Court.  Burn 
claims  the  right  to  be  sworn — sworn  accordingly. 

Q.  Were  you  present  when  the  natives  were  flogged  ? — 

Q.  Were  you  a  member  of  that  assembly  ? — No,  I  had  no 
connection  with  the  proceedings  at  all. 

Q.  Do  you  repudiate  this  meeting  altogether  and  say  you  had 
nothing  at  all  to  do  with  it  ? — Nothing  at  all ;  I  was  an 

Q.  Is  it  true  to  say  you  were  a  sympathiser  ? — No,  I  was  an 

Q.  What  object  had  you  in  being  an  onlooker  ? — To  collect 
copy  for  a  newspaper  for  which  I  contribute  in  London. 

Q.  Had  you  not  been  a  newspaper  correspondent  you  would 
not  have  gone  ? — No,  I  don't  think  I  should.  W.  A.  BURN. 

Above  is  examination  of  the  accused  and  his  signature  thereto. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Burn  calls  as  witness  for  defence  RANALD  DONALD,  Inspector- 
General  of  Police,  Nairobi,  European,  sworn,  states,  in  answer 
to  questions  : — 

I  have  had  the  investigation  of  this  flogging  affair,  or 
partly.  I  have  not  had  all  the  names  of  those  concerned 
in  this  affair.  Since  it  happened  I  have  10  or  12  names 
divulged  to  me. 

Q.  Did  you  instruct  the  Crown  Advocate  to  represent  that  the 
persons  now  accused  in  this  matter  were  the  ringleaders  ? 

Combe  objects  to  question  on  ground  that  it  is  irrelevant. 

Objections  upheld.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 


Witness  proceeds  : — 

I  have  no  other  evidence  against  you  beyond  what  has  been 
produced  in  Court. 
No  more  questions. 

Bead  over  ;  correct.        H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

I  am  of  opinion  that  the  evidence  against  the  accused  Burn 
is  too  weak  to  justify  the  framing  of  any  charge  against  him. 

He,  Burn,  admits  being  present  at  this  assembly.  This  ex- 
planation is  that  he  was  there  as  a  reporter  for  the  purpose  of 
obtaining  copy  for  a  newspaper  which  he  represents. 

He  denies  that  he  had  any  part  whatever  in  the  proceedings, 
or  that  he  was  in  sympathy  with  the  meeting  or  its  objects. 

The  only  evidence  against  him  is  that  he  was  present  standing 
looking  on  on  the  Court  verandah  —(where  as  a  pleader  of  the 
Court  he  had  every  right  to  be  in  ordinary  circumstances) — 
when  this  assembly  took  place,  and  that  he  knew  what  the  object 
of  the  meeting  was. 

Since  he  has  on  his  oath  repudiated  any  connection  in  this 
affair,  I  think  his  explanation  of  his  presence  is  more  or  less 
satisfactory,  and  that  he  should  be  discharged. 

The  Crown  Advocate  not  objecting 

Order  Burn  to  be  discharged  accordingly.       H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Ernest  William  Low,  asked  by  Court,  states  he  has  no  witness 
to  call  on  his  defence.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Ernest  William  Low,  examined  by  Court : — 

Q.  Were  you  a  member  of  this  unlawful  proceeding  on  the 
14th? — Yes,  I  was  present,  but  the  proceeding  was  not  un- 

Q.  Were  not  natives  flogged  at  the  meeting  ? — Yes. 

Q.  Were  you  there  ? — I  was  standing  on  the  verandah  of  the 
Town  Hall. 

Q.  Did  you  belong  to  the  meeting  ? — Yes,  I  presume  everyone 

Q.  Why  were  you  there  ? — I  am  the  editor  or  proprietor  of  the 
Star  and  a  newspaper  correspondent  ;  I  went  there  as  a  spectator, 
and  my  object  was  simply  to  report  what  occurred  as  matters  of 
public  interest.  ERNEST  Low. 

Above  is  the  examination  of  the  accused  Low  and  his  signature 

Accused  Bowker  has  no  witness  to  call.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Accused  Grogan  does  not  wish  to  call  his  witness  at  this 
stage.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 


Captain  Gray  does  not  wish  to  call  any  witnesses. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Adjourn  till  to-morrow.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

March  27,  1907. 

Captain  Fichat  does  not  wish  to  call  any  witnesses. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Mr.  Bowker  does  not  wish  to  call  witnesses,  but  hands  in 
written  statement  (produced).  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

After  carefully  considering  the  evidence  in  this  enquiry  I 
have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  this  case  is  not  a  case  for  com- 
mitment to  Sessions.  There  is  no  evidence  that  either  of  the 
accused  was  armed  with  a  deadly  weapon  or  at  all,  and,  there- 
fore, the  offence  under  Section  144,  I.P.C.,  falls  to  the  ground. 

Neither,  to  my  mind,  is  there  sufficient  evidence  of  rioting  to 
justify  the  case  being  sent  before  a  jury,  Section  147,  I.P.C. 

With  regard  to  the  assault  upon  Captain  Smith,  a  public 
servant,  as  such,  the  evidence  is  very  weak. 

From  the  evidence  before  me  (including  Captain  Smith's)  I 
have  no  doubt  that  a  technical  assault  upon  a  police  officer,  that 
is,  upon  Smith,  did  in  fact  take  place,  but  I  do  not  think  that 
the  assault  can  be  called  more  than  technical. 

From  the  evidence  of  Smith  himself  it  appeal's  to  me  that  he 
never  made  any  serious  endeavour  to  exert  his  full  authority. 

Smith  himself  states  that  on  discovering  this  assembly  was 
intent  upon  its  purposes  he  made  no  further  effort  to  restore 
order  than  the  one  ineffective  attempt  to  get  into  the  centre  of 
the  meeting  which  he  has  described  in  his  evidence. 

He  has  stated  that  on  making  the  discovery  above  referred  to, 
he  went  away. 

Had  he  been  ill-treated,  or  had  he  exerted  his  authority  to  its 
full  and  insisted,  so  far  as  his  power  enabled  him,  on  the  meeting 
dispersing,  or  had  he  in  the  name  of  the  law  called  on  anyone 
to  assist  him  in  restoring  order,  the  case  would  have  been  very 
different.  None  of  these  things  appeal'  to  have  been  done,  and, 
in  the  circumstances,  I  don't  think  the  evidence  of  resisting  a 
police  officer,  as  such,  in  the  execution  of  his  duty  (353  I.P.C.)  is 
sufficiently  strong  as  to  make  it  probable  that  a  jury  would 
convict.  Consequently,  nothing  remains  for  consideration  in 
this  enquiry  except  the  charge,  as  outlined  in  the  summonses, 
against  the  accused  of  being  members  of  an  unlawful  assembly 
in  contravention  of  Section  143  of  the  Penal  Code.  That  offence 
is  triable  by  me  as  a  first-class  Magistrate,  and  since  I  am 
invested  with  this  power,  I  assume  I  am  intended  to  use  it  unless 
a  good  reason  appears  to  the  contrary. 


I  have  followed  the  procedure  as  set  out  in  Section  209  of  the 
Criminal  Procedure  Code  with  regard  to  this  enquiry,  and  I  now 
come  to  that  part  of  the  section  which  states  that  if  at  this  stage 
it  appears  to  the  Magistrate  that  the  case  is  not  one  for  Sessions, 
but  rather  one  which  should  be  tried  by  himself,  he  shall  proceed 
accordingly.  No  proceeding  under  Section  143,  I.P.C.,  in  a 
summons  case. 

I,  therefore,  proceed  to  try,  as  a  summons  case,  the  charge 
made  against  the  accused  of  being  members  of  an  unlawful 
assembly  under  that  section.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

March  27,  1907. 

Accused — Grogan,  Bowker,  Fichat,  and  Low,  summoned  for 
being  members  of  an  unlawful  assembly  under  Section  143,  that 
is,  of  being  members — as  defined  by  Section  142,  I.P.C. — of  an 
assembly  of  five  or  more  persons,  the  common  object  of  such 
assembly  being  the  commission  of  an  offence  within  the  meaning 
of  Section  141,  I.P.C. 

Particulars  of  offence  stated  and  explained  to  accused  in 
accordance  with  Section  242,  Criminal  Procedure  Code. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Bowker  hands  in  statement — has  nothing  to  add  to  it. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Allen,  for  Grogan,  pleads  "  not  guilty."  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Gray  pleads  "  not  guilty."  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Low  pleads  "  not  guilty."  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Fichat  pleads  "  not  guilty."  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Combe  states,  evidence  for  the  prosecution  being  before  the 
Court — does  not  propose  to  call  further  evidence — states  accused 
should  show  cause  why  they  should  not  be  convicted. 

Allen  agrees — no  objections.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

I  think  the  accused  should  have  the  opportunity  of  cross- 
examining  the  prosecution  witnesses  now  they  know  the  specific 
offence  which  is  alleged  against  them. 

Neither  of  the  accused  wishes  to  cross-examine  any  of  the 
witnesses  for  the  prosecution.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Bowker,  in  reply  to  question  from  Court,  says,  "  I  have  no 
other  evidence  to  call  nor  evidence  to  give  other  than  that 
sustained  in  my  statement."  Above  is  full  and  correct  account 
of  accused  statement  made  in  my  presence.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Fichat  states  Crown  have  failed  to  prove  that  he  went  to  an 
unlawful  assembly  with  intent  to  commit  any  offence.  There  is 
no  case  to  be  defended. 


Combe — Crown  had  to  prove  that  there  was  an  unlawful 
assembly  and  that  Fichat  was  a  member  of  it. 

I  hold  there  is  a  case  made  out  for  Mr.  Fichat  to  answer. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

I  asked  the  five  accused  if  they  have  any  statements  they 
wish  to  make.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 


I  was  present  at  the  flogging  on  the  14th  instant  and  flogged 
one  of  the  boys  myself. 

I  did  so  because  I  was  told  by  two  of  my  most  reliable  and 
best  friends,  Messrs.  Grogan  and  Fichat,  that  the  boys  had 
insulted  white  women.  Neither  of  them  said  anything  which 
gave  me  the  impression  that  any  indecent  assault  of  any  sort  or 
kind  had  taken  place. 

As  it  has  always  been  the  first  principle  with  me  to  flog  a 
nigger  on  sight  who  insults  a  white  woman,  I  felt  it  my  bounden 
duty  to  take  the  step  I  did,  and  that  in  a  public  place  as  a 
warning  to  the  natives. 

I  have  lived  for  50  years,  and  ever  among  native  races,  and  I 
have  always  found  that  where  natives  are  treated  with  laxity, 
they  become  insolent,  and  when  insolent  to  white  women  they 
go  further  and  attempt  to  commit  graver  crimes. 

If  I  have  done  wrong,  it  was  done  with  the  best  intention. 


Above  is  statement  handed  in  by  accused  Bowker  and  read 
out  by  me.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Ernest  Low  :  The  substance  of  the  charge  is  that  the  common 
object  of  the  assembly  must  be  illegal.  The  Crown  has  not 
produced  evidence  of  that.  I  therefore  have  no  case  to  answer. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Combe  :  There  is  ample  evidence  of  the  common  object  of  this 
assembly.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

I  hold  that  Low  has  a  primd  facie  case  to  answer. 

H.  O.  DOLBKY. 

Low  objects  to  statement  made  by  Magistrate  in  his  exami- 
nation of  Low  in  preliminary  enquiry,  and  feels  he  is  prejudiced 
thereby.  The  Magistrate's  question  was  "  How  do  you  explain 
your  presence  in  this  unlawful  assembly?"  objecting  to  that 
term  "  unlawful "  as  at  that  point  if  the  assembly  had  not  been 
held  to  have  been  "  unlawful." 

It  is  pointed  out  to  Low  that  it  is  still  open  to  him  to  prove 
that  the  assembly  was  not  an  unlawful  one.  In  reply  to 


Combe,  Low  states  lie  understands  that  from  Magistrate's  state- 
ment he  is  not  now  prejudiced,  and  further  says  nothing  in  his 
objection  is  to  be  taken  as  an  objection  to  the  Magistrate  trying 
the  case.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

ERNEST  Low  demands  to  give  sworn  evidence  in  own  defence. 
Newspaper  proprietor,  European,  Nairobi,  accused,  sworn, 
states : — 

I  am  proprietor  of  the  Star  and  correspondent  for  several 
London  papers.  On  morning  of  March  14th,  at  8.45  a.m.,  I  met 
Fichat,  who  is  a  personal  friend  of  mine,  in  Government  Road 
slightly  below  his  office. 

He  said  that  Grogan  was  going  to  flog  three  natives  for 
having  insulted  two  ladies.  I  have  ascertained  since  who  the 
ladies  were,  but  I  am  not  certain  whether  any  definite  statement 
of  the  identity  was  made  at  this  time. 

I  went  with  Fichat  and  met  Sanderson.  I  spoke  to  Sander- 
son while  Fichat  walked  on  a  bit.  I  told  Sanderson  what 
Fichat  had  told  me  about  Grogan's  flogging.  Fichat  and  I 
went  down  Government  Road  and  saw  Newland.  He  was  on  a 
bicycle.  We  hailed  him  ;  he  dismounted,  and  Fichat  went  up 
and  spoke  to  him  while  I  walked  along  the  footpath. 

I  did  not  hear  what  Newland  and  Fichat  were  saying. 
Fichat  then  rejoined  me  a  minute  later.  He  and  I  remained 
together  up  till  the  beginning  of  the  gathering.  While  on  the 
verandah  of  the  Town  Hall,  at  the  time  of  the  assembly  outside, 
I  saw  Fichat  sitting  on  the  steps.  I  think  he  remained  there 
all  the  time. 

Before  the  gathering  took  place  I  did  not  hear  any  one  state 
that  they  had  been  led  to  believe  there  had  been  an  indecent 
assault.  Many  people  seemed  to  labour  under  that  delusion 
afterwards,  from  what  I  myself  heard.  I  took  no  part  in  the 
proceedings.  I  was,  as  the  only  witness  for  the  prosecution 
who  had  anything  to  say  upon  the  subject  stated,  a  mere  spec- 
tator. I  was  present  as  a  newspaper  correspondent.  Within 
half  an  hour  or  so  of  the  break  up  of  the  assembly  I  sent  a  cable 
to  a  London  daily  newspaper. 

I  was  never  aware  at  any  time  during  the  proceedings  that  I 
was  a  member  of  an  unlawful  assembly.  I  heard  Logan  in 
witness  box  declare  he  addressed  assembly  in  loud  voice.  I 
deny  he  spoke  in  a  loud  voice  at  all.  What  he  may  have  said 
it  was  impossible  for  anyone  to  hear  who  was  not  close  to  him 
to  say.  I  was  not  more  than  two  or  three  yards  away  when  he 
spoke.  I  couldn't  swear  to  anything  he  said  ;  he  spoke  in  an 
indistinct  manner.  To  my  mind  he  was  obviously  addressing 
Captain  Grogan.  It  was  quite  out  of  the  question  that  the  people 


at  the  confusion  of  the  assembly  could  have  heard  him.  He 
was  evidently  in  a  state  of  intense  agitation,  and  to  my  mind 
did  not  appear  to  understand  what  was  happening. 

Cross-examined  by  Combe : 

It  was  about  8.45  when  I  first  heard  Grogan  was  going  to 
beat  some  boys.  I  told  Sanderson  and  possibly  a  lot  of  other 
people  that  this  was  to  take  place.  Fichat  told  me. 

I  heard  it  was  going  to  happen  in  the  centre  of  the  town 

I  don't  know  who  it  was  who  told  me  this.  I  don't  think  it 
was  Fichat.  I  followed  Grogan  down  about  10  to  15  yards 
behind  him.  I  could  not  say  what  I  should  have  done  if  Logan 
had  asked  me  to  go  away. 

I  did  not  know  an  unlawful  act  was  going  to  take  place. 

I  knew  Grogan  was  going  to  flog  a  boy. 

I  did  not  know  that  was  unlawful ;  I  am  not  learned  in  the 

I  went  to  the  meeting  as  a  newspaper  correspondent  and  as  a 
private  citizen.  I  did  not  go  there  solely  to  get  copy. 

Cross-examined  by  Allen  : 

Q.  You  told  Sanderson  about  the  matter ;  so  whatever 
impression  Sanderson  had  of  the  matter  must  have  come  to  him 
from  you  or  Fichat  ? — I  don't  know  ;  he  may  have  got  his  im- 
pressions elsewhere. 

Q.  Did  the  information  seem  to  be  new  to  him  when  you 
imparted  it  ?— I  don't  remember. 

Q.  You  and  Fichat  saw  Newland  passing  a  few  minutes  later  ? 
— Yes.  ERNEST  Low. 

Signatures  of  witness  :  H.  O.  D. 

Above  is  full  and  correct  account  of  Low's  evidence  given  in 
iny  presence  and  hearing.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Low  has  no  witnesses  to  call.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

SYDNEY  FICHAT,  estate  agent,  European,  Nairobi,  an  accused, 
demands  to  give  sworn  evidence,  sworn,  states  : — 

Grogan  told  me  on  March  13th  in  the  evening  that  he  was 
going  to  beat  three  boys  for  insulting  his  sister  and  a  lady 

He  did  not  know  at  that  time  if  he  could  get  the  boys,  but  he 
asked  me  to  go  over  to  his  house  the  next  morning  and  I  would 
get  more  information.  I  went  over  the  next  morning  at  break- 
fast time.  I  saw  Grogan  and  we  discussed  the  matter.  Grogan 
went  outside  the  house  and  came  back  and  said,  "  It's  all  right ; 
the  boys  are  here."  Just  before  leaving  Grogan  told  me  his 


idea  was  to  take  the  boys  down  to  T.  A.  Wood's  premises  in 
Nairobi  and  give  them  a  hiding  there.  Mr.  Wood  is  an 
auctioneer,  and  his  premises  are  just  below  the  Grand  Hotel. 
I  suggested  to  him  the  large  open  space  between  my  premises 
and  the  blacksmith's  shop.  There  was  no  mention  of  our 
specially  coming  to  the  Court  House. 

I  then  left  him — it  would  then  be  about  8.30  a.m. — and  rode 
down  to  my  office.  I  told  people  that  Grogan  was  going  to  beat 
some  natives  for  insulting  ladies.  I  told  Low,  Winealls,  Long- 
worth,  and  several  others. 

I  saw  Low,  and  remained  witli  him  practically  the  whole  time 
until  the  assembly  congregated. 

We  met  Sanderson  and  Low  ;  told  Sanderson  about  the  pro- 
posed flogging  (though  I  did  not  hear  exactly  what  passed),  and 
I  walked  on.  Presently  they  overtook  me,  and  I  told  Sanderson 
what  had  happened  some  months  ago  to  a  personal  member  of 
my  family  in  connection  with  the  indecent  behaviour  of  natives 
towards  white  women.  Sanderson  then  said  something  about 
the  boys  should  properly  be  brought  to  Court  and  not  beaten. 

Newland  then  passed  us  on  his  bicycle.  I  went  up  to  him 
and  I  told  him  what  I  had  told  others,  that  Grogan  was  going 
to  beat  some  boys  for  insulting  his  sister-in-law  and  a  lady 
friend.  I  told  him  also  of  the  incident  that  had  happened  to  a 
member  of  my  family.  I  never  met  Newland  outside  Mrs. 
Elliott's  tea-rooms  that  morning.  I  was  near  the  blacksmith's 
shop,  and  there  met  Grogan  (about  10  a.m.)  coming  up  the  street 
with,  I  think,  Bowker  with  him  and  the  three  native  boys. 

The  boys  were  bound,  their  hands  were,  arid  were  being  led 
by  another  boy.  They  were  brought  here  opposite  the  Court, 
and  there  beaten.  I  sat  on  the  steps  and  watched  the  proceed- 
ings from  start  to  finish.  I  heard  the  conversation  that  took 
place  between  Logan  and  Grogan.  I  never  heard  Logan  say, 
"  Gentlemen,  you  are  committing  an  illegal  act."  I  heard  con- 
versation between  them,  and  heard  Grogan  say,  "  I  am  going  to 
beat  them."  Logan  said,  "What  for?"  And  Grogan  replied, 
"Because  I  want  to."  Grogan  followed  this  up  by  saying, 
"  Because  they  insulted  my  sister  and  another  lady,"  and  heard 
him  say  just  after  this  apparently  to  the  crowd,  "  I  want  no 
interference  ;  there  is  no  indecency  in  this."  The  flogging  took 
place,  and  the  crowd  immediately  started  to  disperse.  I  started 
off  as  soon  as  I  could,  as  I  was  in  a  hurry  to  send  off  a  news- 
paper telegram  to  the  coast,  and  also  because  I  had  a  committee 
meeting  of  the  Colonists'  Association  also  that  morning  at  10. 

As  I  started  off  I  met  Schwartzel,  who  spoke  to  me,  and 
then,  for  the  first  time,  I  saw  Allen.  He  asked  me  a  question 
which  passed  out  of  my  recollection,  as  next  morning  I  had 


forgotten  it.  I  deny  I  ever  mentioned  Mrs.  Bowker's  name  to 
him,  or  that  it  was  in  the  dark,  or  that  three  boys  came  down 
out  of  the  bush  and  held  the  rickshaw  up.  I  also  deny  that  I 
recounted  the  same  thing  that  I  was  alleged  to  have  told  to 
some  other  people  who  came  up  then,  as  Mr.  Allen  states. 

Few  days  after  I  did  meet  Allen,  and  told  him,  in  order  to 
illustrate  how  people  exaggerate  matters,  a  story  I  had  heard 
other  people  say  in  connection  with  the  conduct  of  these 

I  saw  Gray  in  the  street  either  just  before  or  after  the 
assembly,  and  he  mentioned  to  me  that  he  had  heard  that  these 
women  had  been  seriously  assaulted,  and  mentioned  what  ought 
to  be  done  to  the  boys.  I  told  him  it  was  nothing  of  the  kind, 
and  told  him  that  the  women  had  been  insulted. 

Either  Allen  has  confounded  the  different  stories,  or  he  has 
given  vent  to  the  animus  that  has  existed  between  us  for  the 
last  eighteen  months. 

Cross-examined  by  Combe  : 

It  was  about  six  or  half -past  that  I  saw  Grogan  on  March 

It  was  then  he  told  me  he  thought  he  would  give  the  boys 
a  public  hiding.  I  did  not  persuade  him  not  to  do  this.  I 
would  not  attempt  to  reason  with  Grogan  when  he  has  made  up 
his  mind. 

I  am  a  personal  friend  of  Grogan.  I  did  not  deter  him  this, 
because  I  did  not  then  think  it  would  hurt  him. 

I  agreed  with  him  in  thinking  it  was  a  proper  thing  to  do. 

We  did  not  discuss  where  the  flogging  should  take  place  then. 
I  told  no  one  that  night. 

Grogan  and  I  discussed  the  matter  next  morning  at  his  house. 

It  was  next  morning  that  Grogan  said  he  thought  he  would 
go  to  Wood's. 

The  Colonists'  Association  also  meets  at  Wood's  sometimes. 

I  suggested  the  flogging  should  take  place  elsewhere. 

Grogan  did  not  tell  me  to  tell  other  people  about  this 

I  told  Longworth,  Low,  and  Winealls,  as  far  as  I  remember, 
what  actually  had  happened  to  the  ladies  ;  I  told  others  they 
had  been  insulted  simply. 

I  was  the  first  person  in  the  town  to  know  about  this 

I  think  100  to  150  Europeans  were  present  at  the  assembly. 

I  did  not  suggest  to  Newland  that  he  should  be  present 

I  did  not  think  Newland  was  excited  by  what  I  told  him. 

I  don't  remember  exactly  if  he  said  he  would  come  or  not. 


I  am  certain  I  did  not  tell  him  that  ladies  had  been  seriously 
assaulted.  I  am  not  sure  I  did  not  tell  him  what  actually 

I  admit  I  was  present  at  the  assembly. 

I  inwardly  approved  of  this  flogging,  but  by  no  outward 

I  am  sure  that  Grogan  addressed  the  crowd  when  he  said  he 
wanted  no  interference.  He  meant  that  he  was  going  to  beat 
them  himself  and  that  the  matter  was  his  shauri. 

I  did  make  the  remark  in  the  Travellers'  Club  that  the  crowd 
got  together  in  a  record  time.  I  am  not  prepared  to  deny  that 
I  said  I  had  got  a  crowd  together  in  a  record  time. 

No  more  questions.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Allen  cross-examines  : 

Nobody  did  interfere  with  Grogan  except  Gray  and  Bowker, 
if  you  call  that  interference. 

I  saw  nothing  at  the  time  which  would  have  prevented  the 
crowd  interfering  with  Grogan  had  they  so  desired.  There  was 
no  police  or  physical  or  natural  barrier  of  any  sort,  which  would 
have  prevented  the  crowd  flogging  the  boys,  had  they  so  desired, 
except  Grogan's  request.  Captain  Smith  was  the  one  policeman 

After  the  flogging  some  of  the  crowd  called  out:  "Bring  back 
the  first  boy,  he  has  not  had  enough." 

No  further  questions  are  desired  to  be  asked  this  witness. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Above  is  a  full  and  correct  account  of  accused's  evidence 
given  in  my  presence  and  hearing,  and  signed  by  accused. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Captain  Fichat  does  not  desire  to  call  any  witnesses. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Captain  Gray  does  not  wish  to  give  evidence  on  his  own 
behalf,  but  wishes  to  make  this  statement. 

"  In  my  opinion  I  do  not  think  this  was  an  unlawful  assembly, 
and  considering  what  the  natives  had  done,  everything  that 
happened  was  correct.  I  have  served  the  Government  for  ten 
years  and  have  been  through  six  campaigns.  Had  I  thought 
this  an  unlawful  assembly  I  would  have  gone  away  and  done 
it  to  the  natives  somewhere  else.  I  think  any  white  man  with 
any  decency  at  all  would  have  done  likewise.  I  am  Justice  of 
the  Peace  for  the  Eastern  Transvaal  and  the  Natal  Colonies. 

T.  GRAY. 


Above  is  full  and  correct  account  of  accused  (Gray's)  state- 
ment made  in  my  presence  and  hearing  and  signed  by  accused. 

H.  O.  DoLBEr. 

EWART  SCOTT  GROGAN,  settler  resident  at  Nairobi,  accused, 
demands  to  give  evidence  on  oath,  sworn,  states  : — 

I  have  large  interests  in  this  country.  I  am  a  member  of 
the  Municipal  Committee  appointed  by  the  Government,  and 
President  of  the  Colonists'  Association  and  a  Visiting  Justice  to 
Nairobi  Gaol. 

On  March  13th  I  received  a  communication  as  to  the  conduct 
of  some  of  my  rickshaw  boys.  In  consequence  I  went  to  try 
and  find  the  boys ;  I  was  at  the  time  gardening.  I  was 
extremely  angry  at  what  I  had  heard.  My  first  idea  was  to 
seize  them,  but  on  reflection  I  went  to  my  headman  and  my 
syce.  I  found  they  had  both  gone  away — it  was  rather  late, 
about  5.45  p.m.  When  I  came  back  I  found  the  gharri  boys 
had  gone  also.  I  was  angry  and  unwell,  and  walked  halfway  to 
my  brother-in-law's  house  intending  to  discuss  the  matter  with 
him.  I  changed  my  mind  as  to  this  since  no  purpose  would  be 
served  by  this  discussion,  since  he  would  be  as  angry  as  myself 
over  the  matter,  and  went  and  saw  Fichat,  another  neighbour 
of  mine  instead.  I  found  him  at  home  and  said  :  "  Fichat,  I  am 
very  angry."  He  asked  "What  is  the  matter  now,  is  it  the 
Land  Office  again  ? "  I  said  "  No,  more  serious."  I  explained 
to  him  what  had  happened,  and  we  discussed  matters  connected 
with  natives  generally  for  some  time,  and  he  told  me  of  a  case 
of  native  insolent  conduct  towards  a  member  of  his  own  family, 
which  had  moved  him  very  much. 

I  think  he  then  asked  me  what  I  proposed  to  do.  I  am  not 
sure  if  I  then  said  I  meant  to  flog  the  boys  in  public,  it  was 
very  probable  ;  but  at  that  time  I  was  not  sure  whether  I  could 
catch  these  boys,  as  I  thought  it  quite  likely  they  would  not 
come  back. 

I  asked  him  to  come  over  in  the  morning  on  his  way  into 

The  following  morning  he  came  in  while  I  was  having  break- 
fast. There  was  a  certain  amount  of  desultory  conversation 
connected  with  this  subject. 

After  breakfast  I  went  outside  and  got  my  headman  and 
syce,  and  finding  the  gharri  boys  had  returned,  I  collected 
them,  tied  their  hands  behind  their  backs,  and  put  them  into  a 
shed.  I  went  back  into  the  house  and  told  Fichat  I  had  caught 
the  boys,  and  I  think  I  told  him  then  I  would  beat  them  in 
public  definitely. 

(I  remember  in  discussing  this  matter  with  Fichat  the  night 


before  that  he,  to  the  best  of  my  belief,  made  some  remarks  to 
the  effect  that  if  I  did  beat  these  boys  I  should  get  into  trouble, 
but  I  only  have  a  hazy  recollection  of  this.)  This  decision  I 
arrived  at  without  any  encouragement  from  Fichat.  It  was 
purely  my  own  idea  and  my  own  decision. 

It  would  then  have  been  a  quarter  to  nine — Fichat  about  this 
time  went  away. 

At  or  about  9.45  I  came  into  town.  I  brought  the  three 
natives  in  with  me  in  charge  of  three  other  natives,  a  Masai, 
Mkamba  and  Mkavirondo.  I  selected  different  tribes  so  as  to  let 
the  news  circulate  among  different  tribes.  I  came  down  the  main 
road,  past  the  police  station,  and  into  the  main  street.  I  was  still 
undecided  where  to  have  this  flogging.  I  first  thought  of  the 
police  station,  then  thought  the  Collector's  Office,  but  changed 
my  mind  and  went  down  the  street  with  the  intention  of  having 
the  scene  near  Mr.  Wood's  office.  When  I  got  there  I  saw  a 
number  of  people  coming  towards  me  from  different  directions, 
so  I  brought  them  down  to  the  front  of  the  Court  House  and 
drifted  into  the  enclosure.  Logan  came  out  and  stood  on  the 
top  of  the  steps.  He  called  out  to  Bowker,  who  did  not  hear 
him,  he  then  turned  to  me  and  said  :  "  Captain  Grogan,  what 
are  you  doing  ? "  I  replied,  "  I  am  going  to  beat  these  boys  "  ; 
he  said,  "  Why "  ;  I  replied,  "  Because  I  want  to."  He  then 
said,  "  But  what  for"  ;  I  replied,  "  For  insulting  my  sister  and 
a  lady  friend."  I  think  I  gave  some  particulars  ;  I  am  not  sure 
now  whether  I  did  or  not.  At  this  period  a  noise  started,  and 
it  was  very  difficult  to  hear.  I  understood  him  to  say  words  to 
the  effect  that  this  was  nob  the  proper  procedure,  that  I  ought 
instead  to  take  them  before  the  proper  authorities  and  lay  a 
charge.  I  said :  "  I  was  sick  of  being  made  a  fool  of  and  this 
was  a  matter  I  dare  not  trust  to  the  authorities."  There  was  a 
great  noise  at  this  time.  There  were  three  or  four  more 
passages  between  Logan  and  myself,  and  then  Logan  turned 
his  head  away  from  me  and  spoke  to  the  crowd,  and  I  forget  his 
words,  but  he  prefaced  them  with  "  Gentlemen,"  and  said  some- 
thing about  not  taking  the  law  into  our  own  hands.  At  this 
time  there  was  very  considerable  noise.  He  then  went  away 
and  Captain  Smith  came  up. 

I  soon  after  saw  the  crowd  was  getting  very  angry,  and  I 
could  see  that  something  unforeseen  might  occur,  so  I  spoke 
thrice  to  the  crowd,  and  said  I  did  not  want  any  interference  of 
any  sort  or  kind. 

I  also  asked  crowd  to  give  me  their  word  that  after  I  had  done 
with  these  natives  they  would  not  do  anything  more  to  them. 

A  chorus  of  consent  followed. 

The  words  I  used  to  the  crowd  were :  "  Will  you  promise  me 


that  when  I  have  done  with  these  natives  you  will  not  touch 
them  or  do  anything  to  them  'I "  There  was  a  general  shout  of 
"Yes,  promise." 

I  then  asked  if  there  was  anybody  present  who  could  speak 
Kikuyu,  and  a  man  stepped  out,  whom  I  since  know  to  be  Mr. 
Cowlie,  and  I  got  him  to  interpret  to  these  natives  again  what 
I  was  doing  and  why  I  was  doing  it,  and  told  them  to  tell  their 
own  fellow  natives  that  white  men  would  not  stand  any  imper- 
tinence to  their  women-folk. 

Mr.  Cowlie,  presumably,  interpreted  this.  I  then  gave  one 
of  the  boys  25  lashes.  When  I  finished  the  kiboko  I  used  was 
pulled  out  of  my  hand,  the  crowd  closed  in  around  me,  and  I 
did  not  see  what  followed.  I  waited  to  see  the  natives  brought 
out,  and  when  the  crowd  dispersed  and  I  knew  there  was  no 
more  risk  of  trouble,  I  told  the  boys  to  go  off  home.  I  then 
went  to  the  Travellers'  Club,  and  went  from  there  to  T.  A. 
Wood's  to  attend  a  meeting,  for  which  I  had  come  down  into 
town.  My  object  in  flogging  natives  in  public  was  because  I 
have  noticed  my  own  natives  becoming  unruly  owing  to  the 
impossibility  (in  a  great  majority  of  cases)  of  getting  a  convic- 
tion against  them  in  a  Court,  or  to  the  inadequacy  of  punishment 
if  convicted.  I  look  upon  the  safety  of  one's  women-folk  as  a 
matter  of  such  paramount  importance  that  I  do  not  consider  I 
am  justified  as  a  family  man  in  leaving  such  a  matter  to  the 
mercy  of  the  vagaries  of  the  law  and  the  application  thereof. 
I  wished  natives  to  understand,  and  it  should  be  generally 
understood,  that  any  action  of  that  nature  involves  a  far  greater 
risk  than  a  dose  of  horse-tooth  mealies  or  a  mild  suggestion  not 
to  do  it  again. 

My  chief  reason  was  to  provide  an  example  to  the  natives. 
To  let  the  authorities  know  of  the  discontent  which  I  felt  in  this 
matter  was  also  in  my  mind.  There  was  nothing  in  niy  action 
in  the  least  personal  to  the  Magistrate,  who  I  know  has  no 
jurisdiction  over  natives,  and  that  therefore  there  would  be  no 
point  in  making  it  personal  to  the  Magistrate. 

Adjourn  till  to-morrow. 

March  28,  1907. 

Cross-examined  by  Combe  : — 

Fichat  came  to  see  me  on  the  14th  at  my  house  at  my  request. 

I  had  not  finally  made  up  my  mind  to  flog  the  boys  in  public 
till  the  morning  of  March  14th. 

I  probably  told  Fichat  to  come  over  because  I  thought  I 
might  require  his  assistance  to  catch  these  boys. 

I  did  not  tell  anybody  on  the  13th  that  I  was  going  to  flog 
these  boys. 

P.W.  T 


I  told  my  brother-in-law  the  next  morning  of  my  intention, 
but  no  one  else  :  this  was  on  my  way  down  to  town  ;  he  over- 
looked [?  overtook]  me  on  the  road. 

I  caused  no  one  else  to  be  informed. 

I  am  still  surprised  that  so  many  Europeans  should  have 
turned  up. 

I  thought  it  quite  possible  that  news  of  this  affair  would  get- 
about,  though  I  did  not  think  about  the  matter  very  much  at 
the  time. 

I  did  not  think  at  all  about  the  probability  of  Fichat's  talking 
of  it. 

I  should  not  have  wished  it  to  get  about.  The  result,  that  is 
to  say  that  so  many  people  turned  up,  was  probable  in  the 

When  I  said  I  "  drifted  "  to  the  Court,  I  mean  the  unconscious 
movement  of  the  crowd  which  I  accompanied. 

They  did  not  follow  me,  a  large  number  preceded  me. 

I  came  to  the  space  in  front  of  the  Court  deliberately  ;  I  was 
not  forced. 

To  my  knowledge  there  has  been  no  case  brought  before  any 
Magistrate  in  this  Protectorate  in  which  a  native  has  been 
brought  up  for  assaulting  white  women. 

The  boys  were  deliberately  impertinent.  I  did  not  ask  these 
boys  for  any  explanation  before  I  flogged  them.  I  told  them 
simply  why  I  was  going  to  beat  them,  I  did  not  ask  them  if  they 
had  anything  to  say. 

I  would  not  anyhow  take  the  word  of  a  native  against  that  of 
a  white  lady. 

I  did  not  think  it  necessary  to  ask  a  lawyer  if  these  boys 
could  be  legally  punished  ;  I  was  trained  in  the  law  myself. 

They  did  not  deny  it  when  I  told  them  what  I  was  going  to 
beat  them  for.  At  that  time  I  had  made  up  my  mind  to  flog 
them  publicly  ;  nothing  they  could  have  said  would  have  altered 
my  mind,  for  I  don't  admit  of  any  explanation  for  a  native's 
being  impertinent  to  a  lady.  I  deemed  it  necessary  to  ask  the 
crowd  not  to  touch  the  boys  after  I  had  finished  with  them 
from  an  idea  I  had  of  the  demeanour  of  the  crowd. 

Their  demeanour  might  have  been  very  likely  based  on  a 
wrong  impression  of  what  had  occurred. 

No  more  questions. 

Allen  does  not  wish  to  re-examine.  EWART  S.  GROGAX. 

Above  is  full  and  correct  account  of  the  accused's  evidence 
given  in  my  presence  and  hearing,  and  signed  by  the  witness. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Allen  has  no  more  witnesses  to  call.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 


Combe  on  the  case  : — 

Facts  are  not  in  dispute. 

Questions  are  whether  there  was  unlawful  assembly  and  if 
the  accused  were  there. 

Unlawful  assembly  conclusive. 

Nos.  2-5.  Three  participants  in  flogging.  Low  and  Fichat 
who  helped  to  collect  crowd.  All  helped  by  hustling  Smith. 

Common  object  of  crowd  to  witness  or  assist  in  flogging. 

Grogan  :  Deliberate  and  intentional  defied  the  law — leading 
person  in  country — admits  flogging.  Admits  what  occurred  was 
the  probable  result  of  the  act. 

Fichat  assisted  Grogan.  He  quite  approved  of  Grogan's  pre- 
meditated act.  Done  his  best  to  collect  a  big  assembly  ; 
succeeds.  Must  have  known  that  crowd  would  come  to  witness 
flogging.  Admits  membership  of  meeting. 

Bowker :  Active  part.  Flogged  one  of  the  boys.  Bowker 
evidently  didn't  ask  or  care  whether  boys  were  asked  for  any 
explanation  or  had  an  opportunity  of  making  any  defence. 

Gray  :  Also  active  part.  No  defence,  filling  to-  come 
forward  like  Bowker  to  flog  any  native  for  anything,  appa- 

Low  :  Present.  One  purpose  may  have  been  newspaper  work. 
He  admits  that  was  not  his  only  object.  Vide  comment  in 
Low's  (Exhibit  A)  newspaper.  Shows  his  approval.  States  in 
his  paper  the  act  of  flogging  untried  and  unheard  natives, 
supreme  law  people,  and  law  that  has  come  to  stay.  Shows  his 
sympathy  with  meeting. 

Generally,  the  offence  of  taking  law  is  very  grave,  cannot  be 

Replies  of  accused  :  — 

Bowker  does  not  wish  to  address  the  Court  in  his  defence. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Low  addresses  Court  in  his  own  defence.  Irrelevant  matter 
introduced  by  Crown  Advocate. 

Not  charged  with  inciting  people,  so  our  statements  to  people 
that  flogging  would  take  place  is  irrelevant.  Also  not  charged 
with  seditious  writing,  therefore  my  newspaper  not  relevant. 
As  paper  has  been  introduced,  will  read  other  parts  of 

The  leading  article  voices  the  opinion  of  the  paper. 

No  illegal  act  till  the  flogging  of  natives  has  by  legal 
authority,  i.e.,  Court,  been  proved  to  be  illegal.  Crown 
Advocate  has  presumed  illegality.  Therefore,  no  unlawful 
assembly.  (Illustration  of  Low's)  stump  orator,  who  says, 
"  Down  with  the  King  "—does  that  make  crowd  who  heard  him 


guilty  of  an  offence?  One  of  the  two  witnesses  who  saw  me" 
(Low)  at  meeting  describes  me  as  mere  spectator. 

Sanderson  and  Logan  were  spectators  just  as  I  was.  As  a 
newspaper  reporter  I  do  not  join  an  unlawful  assembly  by 
standing  at  a  distance  for  the  purpose  of  reporting  the  proceed- 

Fichat  addressed  Court  in  own  defence.  Maintains,  like 
Low,  that  flogging  the  natives  has  yet  to  be  proved  an  offence. 

Also  must  be  five  convictions,  as  five  is  necessary  number  to 
form  an  unlawful  assembly.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Captain  Gray  addressed  Court  in  own  defence. 
Associates  his  opinion  with  those  already  expressed  by  Low 
and  Fichat.     Nothing  to  say.  H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Allen  (for  Grogan)  addressed  Court : — 

Client  charged  simply  under  Section  143.  Case  not  nearly  so 
serious  now  as  at  the  time. 

No  unlawful  assembly,  as  there  were  not  five  persons  with 
common  object.  .None  of  the  crowd  were  other  than  spectators. 

The  object  of  three  was  to  flog  natives,  of  the  rest  to  look  on. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Judgment  to  be  delivered  on  Tuesday,  April  2nd,  ]  907. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 


April  2,  1907. 

In  this  case  the  accused  Grogan,  Bowker,  Gray,  Fichat,  and 
Low,  are  summoned  for  being  members  of  an  unlawful  assembly 
under  paragraph  143,  I.P.C. 

Section  141  states  that  any  assembly  of  five  or  more  persons 
having  as  its  common  object  the  commission  of  an  offence  is  an 
unlawful  assembly. 

The  term  "  offence  "  for  the  purposes  of  this  section  is  defined 
by  paragraph  40  of  Chapter  II.  of  the  Penal  Code  as  being  any 
offence  punishable  under  the  code  or  under  any  special  or 
general  law  with  imprisonment  for  a  term  of  six  months  or 

Section  142  states  "Whoever  being  aware  of  facts  which 
render  any  assembly  an  unlawful  assembly  intentionally  joins 
that  assembly  or  continues  in  it  is  said  to  be  a  member  of  an 
unlawful  assembly." 

As  the  facts  in  this  case  can  hardly  be  said  to  be  in  dispute, 
it  is  unnecessary  for  me  to  do  more  than  briefly  restate  them. 

On  March  13th  Grogan,  in  consequence  of  information  which 
he  states  he  received  regarding  the  conduct  of  three  of  bis 


gharri-boys,  conceives  the  idea  of  flogging  them  in  public.  On 
the  evening  of  that  day,  and  the  morning  of  the  next,  he 
consults  with  Fichat  on  this  subject,  and  while  in  Fichat's 
company  definitely  decided  upon  this  course  of  action.  On  this 
Fichat  circulates  the  news  of  this  decision  throughout  the  town 
about  an  hour  before  the  act  is  to  take  place  by  informing  a 
variety  of  people  whom  he  meets. 

In  the  circulation  of  this  news  the  evidence  shows  he  is 
assisted  by  Low. 

About  10  o'clock  in  the  morning  of  this  day  (i.e.,  14th 
March),  Grogan  brings  these  three  natives  into  the  town.  On 
his  arrival  he  is  met  by  a  large  crowd  of  Europeans,  estimated 
in  number  from  50  to  250,  who  have  assembled  to  witness  the 
flogging  in  consequence  of  the  announcement  which  Fichat 
circulated.  The  boys  are  taken  in  front  of  the  Court  House, 
the  crowd  accompanying  them. 

On  arrival  there  they  are  met  by  Logan,  the  Town  Magistrate, 
who  asks  the  meaning  of  this  assembly,  and  on  being  informed, 
warns  the  crowd  of  the  illegality  of  their  proposed  action. 

In  spite  of  this  warning,  and  in  spite  also  of  the  efforts  of 
Smith,  of  the  police,  to  prevent  it,  the  flogging  takes  place,  the 
actual  men  to  do  the  flogging  being  Grogan,  Bowker,  and  Gray, 
who  each  flog  one  of  the  natives. 

It  is  this  flogging  that  constitutes  the  offence  which  is  the 
essence  of  the  unlawful  assembly,  the  substance  of  this  charge, 
and  I  find  that  this  offence  is  punishable  under  paragraph  323 
of  the  Code  with  imprisonment  for  one  year.  Thus,  with  regard 
to  the  nature  of  the  offence  the  requirements  of  paragraph  141 
of  I.P.C.  are  fulfilled. 

With  regard  to  the  other  requirements  of  that  section,  it  is 
necessary  that  there  should  be  at  least  five  persons  present  at 
that  assembly  with  the  common  object  of  committing  the 
offence  to  which  I  have  referred. 

Allen  has  argued  that  there  were  not  five  persons  in  fact 
present  whose  object  it  was  to  flog  these  natives ;  that  at  most 
there  were  only  three  with  that  object ;  and  that  the  common 
object  of  the  remainder  of  that  assembly  was  merely  to  look 

I  do  not  think  there  is  very  much  in  that  contention.  With 
regard  to  Grogan,  Bowker,  and  Gray,  their  acts  make  it  obvious 
what  their  object  was.  Fichat  was  present  with  Grogan  when 
the  decision  to  flog  these  natives  was  arrived  at.  He  admits  he 
approved  of  the  idea.  He  made  no  effort  to  dissuade  Grogan, 
who  apparently  originated  the  scheme.  He  states  he  made 
suggestions  as  to  where  the  flogging  should  take  place,  and 
finally  he  collected  the  crowd  who  assembled.  By  this  series  of 


acts  I  find  the  accused,  Fichat,  has  been  guilty  of  abetment  by 
instigation  (Section  107,  I.P.C.).  Abetment  of  this  nature  may 
be  either  direct  or  indirect.  It  is  sufficient  if  the  abettor 
counsels  an  offence,  or  if  he  evinces  an  express  liking,  approba- 
tion, or  assent  to  another  design  of  committing  an  offence 
(Starling  page  119).  It  is  laid  down  that  taking  any  active 
proceeding  either  in  procuring,  inciting,  or  in  some  other  way 
encouraging  the  act  done  by  the  principal  will  bring  a  person 
accused  of  abetment  within  the  section.  Fichat,  to  my  mind, 
has  been  clea'rly  guilty  of  counselling  Grogan  in  his  design  by 
the  suggestion  which  he  admits  he  made  to  Grogan  during  their 
discussions  on  March  13th  and  14th  with  regard  to  the  place 
where  the  flogging  should  take  place.  He  also  admits  that  he 
approved  of  the  act  and  assented  to  it.  It  is  also  clear,  in  my 
mind,  that  by  collecting  a  crowd  to  witness  Grogan's  commission 
of  this  act  that  he  was  thereby  encouraging  the  act. 

In  the  collection  of  this  crowd  Fichat  was  assisted  by  Low  in 
these  proceedings,  and  I  consequently  find  Low  encouraged  the 
act  done  by  Grogan,  and  is  likewise  guilty  of  abetment  by 

In  law  a  person  present  abetting  an  offence  is  to  be  deemed  to 
have  committed  that  offence  though,  in  fact,  he  does  not  do  so 
any  more  than  a  principal  in  the  second  degree  (Starling  page 
130).  He  is  to  be  considered  as  a  principal  (Reg.  &  Shib. 
Chunder  Mudle,  Starling  page  131).  The  punishment  for  both 
principal  and  abettor  in  the  offence  in  question  is  the  same,  and 
I  do  not  think  that  there  is  any  distinction  to  be  drawn  between 
the  common  objects  of  Grogan,  Bowker,  Gray,  and  that  of 
Fichat  and  Low. 

I  think  there  is  complete  evidence  of  the  presence  of  the  five 
persons  necessary  under  the  section  without  including  the 
witness  Newland  who,  in  his  evidence,  stated  that  he  attended 
the  meeting  for  the  purpose  of  taking  part  in  the  object  which 
it  possessed. 

But,  however  this  may  be,  assuming  for  an  instant  that  this 
meeting  was  a  lawful  assembly  at  its  commencement,  there 
cannot  be  much  doubt  but  that  it  subsequently  became  an 
unlawful  one. 

After  the  illegality  of  its  object  had  been  stated  to  the 
assembly  by  Logan,  the  Town  Magistrate,  the  crowd  still 
remained,  and  actively  assisted  Grogan,  Bowker,  and  Gray  in 
the  prosecution  of  their  purpose  by  forcibly  preventing  any 
interference  by  Captain  Smith,  the  police  officer,  when  he 
attempted  to  intervene.  They  cheered  these  three  men  at  the 
close  of  the  proceedings,  and  further  evidence  as  to  their 
intention  is  disclosed  by  the  fact  that  Grogan  himself  found  it 


necessary  to  extract  promises  from  them  that  they  would  not 
molest  these  three  men  when  he  had  finished  with  them. 

They  all  became  abettors  of  the  offence,  and  since  the  lowest 
computation  of  their  number  is  almost  fifty,  I  have  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  assembly  was  an  unlawful  assembly  within 
the  meaning  of  Section  141,  and  find  accordingly. 

Having  come  to  this  conclusion,  and  also  to  the  conclusion 
that  those  of  the  accused  who  are  not  guilty  as  principals  in  this 
affair  are  guilty  as  abettors,  it  necessarily  follows,  since  they 
were  all  admittedly  present  at  this  meeting,  that  they  were 
members  of  this  unlawful  assembly  within  the  meaning  of 
Section  142. 

I  will,  however,  leave  for  the  moment  the  question  as  to  the 
degree  of  criminality  attaching  to  each  of  the  accused  as  such 
members,  and  return  to  it  later. 

The  next  point  for  consideration  is  the  magnitude  of  the 
offence,  the  commission  of  which  formed  the  object  of  this 

From  first  to  last  it  appears  to  me  that  out  of  all  the  people 
present  assisting  at  the  flogging  of  these  men,  there  was  no  one 
of  that  number  who  ever  took  the  trouble  to  satisfy  himself  as 
to  whether  these  natives  had  ever  done  anything  deserving  of 
punishment  at  all.  There  was  no  trial  of  any  sort  nor  any  form 
or  pretence  of  trial.  These  boys  were  neither  asked  whether 
they  had  any  defence  or  explanation  to  give,  nor  does  it  appear 
that  they  ever  had  any  opportunity  of  making  one.  Grogan, 
who  ordered  the  flogging,  has  himself  stated  that  no  plea  or 
defence  which  they  might  have  made  would  have  diverted  him 
from  his  purpose. 

This  is  a  very  unpleasant  feature  in  the  case,  and  I  consider 
that  of  its  class  this  offence  is  about  as  bad  as  it  can  be.  Yet, 
in  my  opinion,  it  is  further  aggravated  by  the  fact  that  the 
place  selected  for  this  unlawful  act  was  directly  in  front  of  the 
Court  House. 

It  has  been  stated  in  defence  that  this  selection  was  not  a 
matter  of  pre-arranged  choice,  but  the  fact  remains  that  this 
situation  was  chosen  and  continued  on  after  the  Town  Magis- 
trate had  made  his  protest  to  the  crowd  to  desist  from  their 

In  face  of  these  facts  I  am  compelled  to  take  a  serious  view  of 
the  offence,  and  with  regard  to  their  respective  participation  in 
it,  I  will  first  deal  with  the  cases  of  the  accused,  Fichat  and 

For  reasons  that  I  had  already  stated  I  find  Fichat  was  an 
abettor  of  this  flogging,  in  fact,  the  most  active  abettor. 

I  think  the  words  he  is  stated  to  have  used  in  the  Travellers' 


Club,  and  which  he  has  not  denied,  to  the  effect  that  he  had  got 
together  a  crowd  in  a  record  time,  give  the  best  indication  of  the 
part  he  has  played  in  this  affair. 

As  regards  Low — since  I  have  already  found  him  to  be  a 
member  of  this  unlawful  assembly  and  an  abettor  of  the  offence 
committed  by  it,  I  need  not  go  at  any  length  into  his  defence 
whereby  he  pleads  that  he  was  a  newspaper  reporter  present  to 
make  a  report  of  the  proceedings.  He  admits  in  cross-examina- 
tion that  this  was  not  his  only  object. 

The  evidence  shows  he  assisted  Fichat  in  the  collection  of  this 
record  crowd  which  directly  encouraged  the  commission  of  the 
offence,  but  I  do  not  think  he  was  an  abettor  to  as  large  an 
extent  as  Fichat. 

I  sentence  Fichat  to  14  days'  and  Low  to  7  days'  simple  im- 

With  regard  to  the  accused,  Bowker  and  Gray,  they  were 
members  of  this  unlawful  assembly  who  each  took  an  active  part 
in  the  flogging.  The  statement  put  in  by  Bowker  is  no  defence 
at  all  to  the  charge  against  him,  and  the  points  raised  by  Gray 
in  the  statement  made  by  him  to  the  Court  have  already  been 
dealt  with  in  this  judgment. 

I  convict  them  both,  and  sentence  each  to  14  days'  simple  im- 
prisonment, and  (each)  to  pay  a  fine  of  Es.  250,  in  default  14  days' 
simple  imprisonment  additional.  The  worst  case  of  all  is  that  of 
E.  S.  Grogan,  who  originated  the  whole  affair.  I  have  been 
careful  in  considering  his  defence  to  weigh  the  reasons  for  his 
actions  which  he  has  put  forward,  but  I  cannot  find  any  justifi- 
cation of  any  sort  or  kind  which  can  be  urged  on  his  behalf. 

Owing  to  the  position  which  he  occupied  he  was  a  man  to 
whom  the  Government  ought,  with  reasonable  expectation  of 
success,  to  have  been  able  to  look  for  assistance  in  the  keeping  of 
law  and  order.  In  fact,  from  the  evidence  in  this  case,  it  is  clear 
that  he  has  used  his  influence  toward  the  commission  of  a  most 
lawless  act  in  open  and  premeditated  defiance  of  the  authorities. 

Having  regard  to  the  circumstances  I  do  not  see  what  other 
constructions  can  be  placed  upon  his  actions. 

I  cannot  find  the  slightest  foundation,  in  fact,  for  his  state- 
ment that  the  offence  which  he  alleges  these  natives  to  have 
committed  constituted  a  matter  of  such  paramount  importance 
that,  having  at  heart  the  safety  of  his  women  folk,  he  dare  not 
trust  this  matter  to  be  dealt  with  by  what  he  describes  as  the 
vagaries  of  the  law  and  the  application  thereof. 

On  his  own  showing  the  safety  of  his  women  folk  was  never 
involved — at  most  these  natives  had  only  been  guilty  of  imper- 
tinence— and  on  his  own  admission  he  has  no  recollection  of  any 
case  ever  being  brought  before  the  Courts  of  this  Protectorate 


in  which  natives  have  been  charged  with  indecent  conduct  to 
white  women. 

But  I  should  add  that,  to  my  mind,  there  is  nothing  more 
calculated  to  set  a  bad  example  not  only  to  natives  but  to  others 
also  than  exhibitions  of  lawlessness  of  the  kind  of  which  Grogan 
himself  has  been  guilty. 

The  order  of  this  Court  is  that  he  be  imprisoned  for  one  month 
simple  imprisonment,  and  pay  a  fine  of  Rs.  500,  in  default  one 
month  simple  imprisonment  additional. 

Convictions  and  sentences  under  Section  143,  I.P.C. 

H.  O.  DOLBEY. 

Enclosure  2  in  No.  8. 
"  The  Times  of  East  Africa?  Saturday,  April  6th,  1907. 


To  say  that  the  judgment  given  on  Tuesday  came  to  one  and 
all  as  an  oppressive  shock  is  to  state  the  facts  mildly.  From  a 
comedy  has  emerged  tragedy,  and  of  no  mild  type.  The  law  has 
been  outraged  and  the  culprits  must  pay  the  price.  But  how 
have  our  all-wise  and  all-seeing  ruling  powers  decreed  that  the 
penalty  shall  be  enacted  ?  By  the  degradation  of  imprisonment 
without  option  of  fine  or  appeal,  the  degradation  of  incarceration 
in  a  common  gaol  full  of  the  vilest  scum  of  our  Indian  and 
native  population  !  The  daily  subject  of  the  jeering  scrutiny  of 
the  fellow  brutes  of  those  whose  insults  to  our  womenkind  led  to 
the  climax  which  now  occupies  all  our  minds  !  !  The  triumphant 
ridicule  of  the  negro  from  Mombasa  to  the  Lake  and  tt>  the 
extreme  limits  of  Kenia  !  !  !  Such  is  the  just  and  wisely-decreed 
ordeal  that  our  five  fellow-townsmen  are  condemned  to  undergo. 
And  all  for  what  ?  Because,  to  go  to  the  root  of  matters,  three 
men  stood  up  publicly  to  punish  an  insult  to  white  women  and 
two  others  who  have  dared  in  the  past  to  lift  their  voice  in  con- 
demnation of  the  puerile  and  inefficient  administration  which  we 
have  suffered  were  present  to  see  the  act  performed.  True,  the 
charge  was  that  of  being  present  at  an  unlawful  assembly. 
What  in  itself  was  that  ?  Nothing  but  an  assembly  to  mete  out 
due  reparation  to  offenders  whom  it  was  felt  the  law  would 
inadequately  deal  with.  But  granted  that  the  punishment  is 
awarded  for  the  breach  of  the  law  aforesaid  and  that  the  Govern- 
ment and  the  Europeans  in  this  dependency  recognise  it  simply 
and  solely  in  this  light,  that  is  not  where  the  colossal  error  has 
been  made.  The  only  question  with  which  we  have  to  deal  is 
"  What  will  the  native  think  ?"  Does  the  Government  delude 
itself  and  want  to  induce  us  to  believe  that  our  black  hordes 
will  take  this  simple  view  ?  No  greater  mistake  was  ever  made. 


Not  a  single  native  but  will  conclude  inevitably  that  five 
Europeans  have  been  sent  to  gaol  because  they  lifted  their  hands 
to  punish  an  offence  by  natives  against  white  women.  Not  a 
single  black  but  will  decide  that  he  can  do  no  wrong  which  will 
entail  punishment  at  the  hands  of  the  law  whether  it  be  mere 
insult  to  our  women  or  worse.  Argue  as  much  as  you  like,  you 
who  administer  justice  according  to  the  creed  of  Exeter  Hall  and 
those  enlightened  statesmen  who  wished  to  preclude  Natal's  just 
retribution  on  black  offenders.  An  ineradicable  impression  has 
been  made  on  the  native  mind,  an  impression  that  cannot  fail  to 
bear  fruit.  A  day  will  most  surely  come  when  those  responsible 
for  this  gigantic  folly  will  be  forced  to  recognise  the  peril  which 
their  act  has  generated. 

The  majesty  of  the  law  must  be  upheld.  Rightly  !  But 
would  not  the  law  have  been  adequately  satisfied  with  the 
imposition  of  a  fine  ?  Never,  we  believe,  has  the  prestige  of  our 
race  been  dragged  so  low  as  those  responsible  for  the  mainten- 
ance of  that  prestige  have  dragged  it  now.  They  have  meted 
out  punishment  not  to  five  men  but  to  the  whole  of  the  white 
inhabitants  of  a  territory  who  are  absolutely  at  the  mercy  of 
teeming  numbers  of  brutal  savages.  We  hope  they  are  satisfied. 


Immediately  the  verdict  by  the  magistrate,  on  Tuesday 
morning  last,  in  Rex.  v.  Grogan  and  others  was  pronounced,  it 
was  felt  that  only  one  course  of  lawful  action  was  open  to  the 
public,  and  a  mass  meeting  was  arranged  for  3  p.m.  to  protest 
against  the  frightful  enormity  in  which  the  trial  had  terminated. 
The  sentences  were  as  follows  : — 

Captain  E.  S.  Grogan,  to  one  month  simple  imprisonment 
and  pay  a  fine  of  Rs.  500. 

W.  R.  Bowker  and  I.  T.  Gray,  to  14  days'  simple  imprison- 
ment and  pay  a  fine  of  Rs.  250. 

S.  C.  Fichat,  14  days'  simple  imprisonment. 

E.  W.  Low,  7  days'  simple  imprisonment. 

Judgment  having  been  postponed  for  four  days,  a  general 
rumour  was  current  that  inspiration  had  been  sought  from  that 
centre  of  fanatical  intolerance,  the  Colonial  Office.  To  that 
fount  of  right  and  justice,  then,  it  was  determined  to  appeal. 

Shortly  after  3  p.m.  about  150  settlers  and  business  men  met 
in  Mr.  T.  A.  Wood's  auction  room,  and  no  time  was  lost  in 
getting  through  the  agenda.  The  meeting  was  extremely 
orderly  and  business-like,  but  the  administration  evidently 
imagined  that  their  last  hour  was  come,  for  almost  the  whole  of 


the  white  police  were  present.  We  noticed  the  Inspector- 
General  of  Police,  the  Deputy  Inspector-General,  and  five 
inspectors.  What  fears  were  knocking  at  the  hearts  of  our 
rulers  ?  Had  not  the  occasion  precluded  merriment,  this  great 
array  of  power  would  have  furnished  much  cause  for  laughter1. 

Mr.  W.  A.  Burn  opened  the  meeting,  the  chair  being  taken 
bv  Mr.  T.  A.  Wood.  The -first  on  the  agenda  was  a  resolution 
by  Mr.  Burn,  seconded  by  Mi1.  Sergeant : — 

"That  this  meeting  desires  to  express  to  the  Secretary 
of  State  its  emphatic  protest  against  the  sentences  of 
imprisonment  passed  upon  Europeans  to-day  in  the  case 
Rex  v.  Grogan  and  others,  which  will  convey  to  the  native 
mind  that  they  have  been  punished  for  flogging  natives, 
and  this  meeting  is  of  opinion  that  the  policy  of  the 
Government  in  this  case  renders  the  presence  of  Europeans 
in  this  Protectorate  practically  untenable."  Carried  un- 

Discussion  was  then  invited,  and  an  amendment  suggested  by 
Mr.  Gulowsen  to  the  effect  that  the  words  "  and  other  matters  " 
be  deleted  having  met  with  general  approval,  the  resolution  thus 
altered  was  put  to  the  meeting  and  carried  with  only  one 
dissentient.  We  cannot  congratulate  Mr.  Skellorn  on  the 
ill-judged  and  ignorant  stand  he  took  on  this  and  the  following 
resolutions.  We  trust  that  the  stinging  rebuke  administered 
by  Mr.  Douglas  and  the  firm  attitude  of  the  chairman  have 
given  him  food  for  thought. 

The  Rev.  P.  A.  Bennett  followed  with  a  resolution  which, 
with  the  explanatory  comments  introducing  it,  met  with  a 
storm  of  hearty  cheers.  Mr.  Bennett  pointed  out  that  he  could 
not  be  accused  of  partisanship  in  preferring  this  motion.  He 
was  not  a  friend  of  Mr.  Low  nor  did  he  hold  with  all  that  Mr. 
Low,  as  editor  of  the  Star,  published  in  his  paper.  This, 
however,  was  not  a  time  to  think  of  personal  feelings.  He 
viewed  the  matter  from  the  standpoint  of  justice  only  and  asked 
one  and  all  to  sink  private  differences,  as  he  was  doing,  and 
give  the  resolution  their  fullest  support.  Mr.  Phipps-Coles 
having  seconded  in  a  pithy  little  speech,  the  resolution  which 
follows  was  put  to  the  meeting  and  carried  amid  strong 
applause  : — 

"  That  this  meeting  wishes  to  offer  its  indignant  and  emphatic 
protest  to  the  Secretary  of  State  against  the  sentences  of 
imprisonment,  without  the  option  of  an  appeal,  passed 
upon  Mr.  E.  Low,  the  editor  of  the  Star,  in  the  case  Rex 
v.  Grogan  and  others,  as  in  the  opinion  of  this  meeting 
there  was  nothing  in  the  evidence  or  in  fact  to  justify  his 


selection  from  amongst  the  150  other  onlookers."     Carried 

Mr.  Douglas  then  rose  to  address  the  meeting  preparatory  to 
proposing  a  third  resolution.  In  a  few  well-chosen  words, 
which  were  clearly  heard  by  all,  he  pointed  out  the  dangers 
that  must  follow  the  action  of  the  Government  in  the  matter 
under  discussion,  and  instanced  the  obstinacy  and  ignorance  of 
the  Administration  in  refusing  to  benefit  by  the  dearly-bought 
experience  of  the  Governments  of  the  South  African  Colonies. 
He  then  put  as  a  resolution  : — 

"  That  the  several  Governments  of  South  Africa  be  ap- 
proached to  intercede  against  sentences  of  imprisonment 
without  option  against  Messrs.  Eussell  Bowker,  Gray, 
Fichat,  Grogan,  and  Low  (all  South  Africans)  for  flogging 
natives  publicly  for  insolence  to  white  women."  Carried 

This,  being  supported  by  Mr.  Watkins  in  a  forcible  speech, 
was  unanimously  carried. 

A  motion  by  Mr.  T.  H.  Howitt,  seconded  by  Mr.  H.  Tarlton, 
was  next  preferred,  which  suffered  a  slight  amendment  before 
being  put  to  the  meeting.  It  read  : — 

"  That  a  public  subscription  be  raised  to  provide  funds  for 
costs  of  appealing  and  paying  fines  if  necessary  and  cabling 
above  resolutions."     Carried  unanimously. 
Referring  to  this  motion,  Dr.  Grice  sensibly  pointed  out  that, 
as  it  would  take  some  little  time  to  effect  anything  by  cable,  it 
would,  perhaps,  not  be  without  result  if  a  deputation  were  sent 
to    ask    the    Acting    Commissioner    for    amended    conditions 
regarding  the  imprisonment  of  those  committed  to-day.     The 
resolution  read  as  follows  : — 

"That  this  meeting  appoint  a  committee  to   approach  the 
Acting  Commissioner  to  ask  for  amended  conditions  regard- 
ing the   imprisonment   of  Grogan  and  others  committed 
to-day."    Seconded  by  Mr.  G.  Evans.    Carried  unanimously. 
The  next  resolution  was  proposed  by  Mr.  F.  Watkins  and 
seconded  by  Mr.  Burn  : — 

"  That  the  preceding  resolutions  be  forwarded  to  the  Acting 
Commissioner  with  a  request  that  they  be  cabled  to  the 
Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies  and  that  this  meeting  is 
prepared  if  necessary  to  provide  funds  for  that  purpose." 
Carried  unanimously. 

Mr.  Howitt  proposed,  seconded  by  Mr.  P.  Coles  : — 
"That  five  gentlemen  be   elected  to  approach  the  Acting 
Commissioner."     Carried. 


The  following  gentlemen  were  elected  : — Messrs.  T.  A.  Wood, 
Douglas,  Bayldon,  Gulowsen,  and  Grice. 

After  a  vote  of  thanks  to  the  chairman,  the  meeting  dispersed 

No.  9.      The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Acting  Commissioner. 
(Sent  10.20  a.m.,  May  1,  1907.) 

Referring  to  your  dispatch,  April  30,  did  natives  receive 
serious  injuries  ?  What  was  exact  nature  of  insult  for  which 
they  were  flogged  ? — ELGIN. 

No.  10.    The  Acting  Commissioner  to  the  Secretary  of  State. 
(Received  3.10  p.m.,  May  3, 1907.) 

No.  68.  Your  Lordship's  telegram  of  1st  May.  Medical 
officer  certifies  that  two  of  the  natives  received  simple  hurt  and 
one  severe  hurt  nearly  amounting  to  grievous  hurt.  Last 
mentioned  was  in  hospital  for  considerable  period. 

Exact  nature  of  insult,  according  to  statement  of  Miss  Mac- 
donell,  one  of  two  ladies  said  to  have  been  insulted,  was 
impertinence  and  shaking  shafts  of  rickshaw. — JACKSON. 

No.  11.  The  Secretary  of  State  to  the  Governor. 

Downing  Street,  June  18,  1907. 

SIR, — I  have  the  honour  to  acknowledge  the  receipt  of  Mr. 
Jackson's  despatch  of  the  9th  April,  forwarding  a  report  of  the 
trial  and  conviction  of  Captain  Grogan  and  Messrs.  Bowker, 
Gray,  Fichat,  and  Low,  on  charges  arising  out  of  the  flogging 
of  natives  in  Nairobi  on  14th  of  March.  I  have  also  received 
Mr.  Jackson's  telegram  of  the  23rd  of  April,  transmitting  a 
message  from  the  Colonists'  Association  complaining  of  the 
action  of  the  local  administration  and  of  a  statement  reported 
to  have  been  made  by  me  in  the  House  of  Lords  and  asking 
that  a  Commission  might  be  appointed  to  inquire  into  these  and 
other  alleged  grievances. 

2.  The  report  shows  that  the  offenders  had  a  fair  and  full 
trial,  and  that  there  was  little  dispute  as  to  the  facts.  The 
contention  of  the  defendants — with  the  exception  of  Low,  who 
claimed  that  he  was  a  mere  spectator — was  that  the  flogging 


was  justified  because  the  natives  had  been  guilty  of  insulting 
white  women  ;  e.g.  the  defendant  Bowker  expressed  himself  as 
follows  : — "  As  it  has  always  been  the  first  principle  with  me  to 
flog  a  nigger  on  sight  who  insults  a  Avhite  woman,  I  felt  it  my 
bounden  duty  to  take  the  step  I  did,  and  that  in  a  public  place 
as  a  warning  to  the  natives." 

3.  I  fully  appreciate  the  importance  attached  by  the  white 
settlers  to  the  protection  of  their  wives  and  families  from  insult 
or  assault.     But  I  have  to  point  out  that  the  law  provides  most 
severe  penalties  for  such  offences. 

4.  Natives  charged  with    such   offences   would   be   tried  by 
white  magistrates  and  judges,  who  would  not  be  inclined  to  be 
unduly  lenient  to  offenders,  particularly  if  the  injured  party 
were  a  white  woman.     But,  as  a   matter  of  fact,  it  does  not 
appear  that  any  crimes  of  this  nature  have  been  brought  before 
the  Courts  of  the  Protectorate,  and  it  is  accordingly  impossible 
to  plead  delay  or  refusal  of  justice  as  a  justification  for  the 
action  of  the  defendants  in  the  present  case  in  taking  the  law 
into  their  own  hands.     Moreover,  it  appears  from  your  telegram 
of  the  3rd  instant,  that  the  insult  alleged  was  of  the  most  trivial 

5.  The  place  and  the  circumstances  of  the  flogging— in  front 
of  the  Court  House  and  in  spite  of  the  protest  'of  the  Magistrate 
— make  it  clear  that  it  was  intended  to  be  a  deliberate  defiance 
of    settled    order    and    government,    and    the    offenders    were 
fortunate  in  not  being  convicted  on  the  more  serious  charges 
of  riot  and  assault  on  a  public  officer.     The  conduct  of  the 
defendant   Fichat,   who    appears   from    the    evidence   to  have 
deliberately    spread    a    report    that    white    women    had    been 
seriously  assaulted,  well  knowing  it  to  be  false,  cannot  be  too 
strongly  reprobated.     No  doubt  many  persons  were  thus  led  to 
take  part  in  the  assembly  who  would  not  have  done  so  if  the 
true  facts  had  been  known  to  them. 

6.  With  regard  to  the  telegraphic  message  from  the  Colonists' 
Association,  I  see  no  ground  for  saying  that  the  prosecution  of 
the  offenders  in  this  case  was  a  political  one,  unless  there  is  a 
party  in  Nairobi  which  advocates  as  a  policy  the  indiscriminate 
flogging  of  natives  for  trivial  offences  without  trial  ;  and  the 
question  whether  many  of  the  Europeans  present  at  the  flogging 
were  armed  or  not  does  not  materially  affect  the  gravity  of  the 
offence  committed.     I  see  no  reason,  therefore,  for  appointing  a 
Commission  to  enquire  into  the  circumstances  of  the  flogging, 


Commission  to  enquire  into  the  circumstances  of  the  flogging, 
which  are  in  other  respects  sufficiently  established  by  the 
evidence  given  at  the  trial. 

7.  The  fears  of  a  native  rising  which  induced  some  of  those 
who  took  part  in  the  flogging  to  demand  arms  and  ammunition 
for  their  protection  do  not  appear  to  have  had  any  foundation. 
I  am  bound  to  observe,  however,  that  the  commission  of  such 
flagrant  acts  of  lawlessness  and  injustice  as  those  of  which  the 
defendants  in  this  case  have  been  found  guilty  is  the  surest  way 
to  provoke  an  outbreak.  In  the  interests  not  only  of  the 
natives  (constituting  as  they  do  an  immense  majority  of  the 
population)  but  also  of  the  innocent  white  inhabitants,  it  is 
the  duty  of  the  Government  to  restrain  and  punish  those  who 
commit  such  acts,  and  you  will  be  able,  if  necessary,  to  make 
use  of  the  provisions  of  the  East  Africa  Order  in  Council,  1902, 
which  authorize  the  deportation  of  any  person  who  conducts  him- 
self so  as  to  be  dangerous  to  peace  and  good  order  in  East  Africa. 
I  have,  etc.  ELGIN. 

EXERCISE  No.  7. 


The  Estimates  for  1908-9  amount  to  £32,319,500  as  opposed 
to  £31,419,500  for  the  current  year. 

A  statement  of  the  gross  expenditure  on  the  Naval  Service 
has  been  placed  at  the  beginning  of  the  printed  Estimates, 
which  shows  that  although  Parliament  is  asked  to  vote  £900,000 
more  money  this  year  than  last,  the  total  outlay  for  the  year  will 
stand  at  a  figure  of  £13,984  only  in  excess  of  that  for  1907-08. 

It  is  an  accepted  axiom  in  the  finance  of  the  Navy  that  the 
governing  factor  is  the  provision  for  new  construction,  but  for 
the  next  financial  year  a  variety  of  unusual  causes  combine  to 
create  an  actual  increase  in  the  cash  provision  which  Parliament 
is  asked  to  vote  for  the  Navy,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the  new 
building  programme  put  forward  by  the  Admiralty  is  exceed- 
ingly modest. 

In  1904-5  the  Estimates  stood  at  £36,889,000.  The  succeed- 
ing years  have  shown  successive  reductions  of  £3,500,000  in 
1905-6,  £1,520,000  in  1906-7,  and  £450,000  in  1907-8  (as  I 
explained  in  my  Statement  last  year,  the  reduction  then  was 
really  £1,427,091,  in  consequence  of  the  transfer  of  loan  expendi- 
ture to  the  Works  Vote). 


In  each  of  these  years  of  falling  Estimates  the  Admiralty  were 
able  to  reduce  the  cash  provision  for  stores  by,  on  the  average, 
£1,000,000— the  figure  last  year  being  £1,241,800— owing  to  the 
large  redundancy  of  stores  created  by  the  reforms  in  dockyard 
administration  and  by  the  redistribution  of  the  Fleet,  which 
were  determined  on  and  carried  out  by  the  late  Board  of 
Admiralty.  Of  these  surplus  stocks  about  half  a  million's 
worth  still  remain  and  will  be  exhausted  during  the  coming 

A  fresh  sum  of  some  £700,000  has  therefore  to  be  provided 
to  buy  the  balance  of  Naval  stores  required  for  1908-9.  By 
1909-10,  surplus  stocks  will  have  practically  disappeared,  and 
then  the  whole  of  the  stores  required  for  the  Fleet  will  have  to 
be  provided  for  in  cash  by  Parliament. 

Apart  from  the  cessation  of  the  abnormally  low  cash  provi- 
sion for  stores,  there  are  certain  items  in  the  Estimates  which 
show  an  increase,  over  which  the  Board  of  Admiralty  have  no 
control  whatever.  Improvements  in  pay  granted  in  previous 
years  increase  the  Pay  Vote  by  £150,000  ;  the  Pension  Votes 
are  £70,000  higher;  a  sum  of  £300,000  has  to  be  found  to 
provide  the  balance  of  £500,000  for  cooling  the  magazines  on 
board  His  Majesty's  ships — a  service  announced  to  the  House  of 
Commons  in  last  year's  Estimates  Debate ;  the  Cunard  subsidy 
for  the  Lusitania  and  Mauretania  stands  now  at  the  full  amount 
of  £150,000  per  annum;  prices  have  gone  up,  by  £284,000  in 
coal  alone ;  and  the  annuity  in  repayment  of  advances  under 
the  Naval  Works  Loan  Acts  now  reaches  the  large  sum  of 
£1,264,000.  In  fact,  Parliament  and  the  Board  are  faced  with 
automatic  or  uncontrollable  increases  which  make  any  reduction 
of  the  total  Estimates  impracticable. 

By  strict  economy  the  Admiralty  have  been  able  to  bring 
down  the  inevitable  increase  to  £900,000,  the  figure  we  now  ask 
Parliament  to  sanction. 

It  is  interesting  to  recapitulate  the  salient  features  of  Naval 
expenditure  during  the  last  eight  years : — 

The  total  net  sum  voted  for  Naval  Services  in 

1900-1  was    -  £30,041,900 

This  was  increased  by  about  a  million  for  the  two 
subsequent  years,  and  in  1903-4  it  advanced 
to  £35,727,500.  In  1904-5  it  reached  its 
highest  limit,  namely 36,889,500 

In  1905-6  there  was  a  decrease  of  3,500,000 

And  in   the   two  following  years  an  aggregate 

decrease  of 1,970,000 

'The  increase  proposed  in  1908-9  -  900,000 

'Bringing  the  net  total  to 32,319,500 


Now  taking  loan  money : — 

The  annuity  under  the  Naval  Works  Acts  first 
became  finally  chargeable  to  Naval  funds  in 
1902,  the  amount  for  that  year  being  -  -  £122,255 

This  has  increased  each  year  on  account  of  fresh 
advances  of  loan  money,  until  it  has  reached 
a  total  of— for  1908-9  *  -  1,264,032 

The  expenditure  on  Works  under  the  Naval 
Works  Acts  began  in  1895-6,  in  which  year 
it  amounted  to  -  721,099 

It  gradually  increased  until  in  1904-5  it  amounted 

to  __---.--  3,402,575 

In  the  last  completed  year,  1906-7,  it  had  fallen  to      2,431,201 

It  is  estimated  that  the  outlay  from  loan  in  1907-8 

will  be  1,135,000 

And  in  1908-9      -------         896,925 


New  construction  for  the  year  will  cost  £7,545,202  as  against 
£8,100,000  for  1907-08.  The  continuous  fall  in  the  estimate  for 
new  construction  from  the  maximum  of  £11,654,176  in  1904-05 
is  thus  carried  on,  and  Parliament  is  asked  to  vote  £4,108,974 
less  than  it  was  four  years  ago.  Of  this  sum  of  £7,545,202, 
£6,795,202  will  be  spent  on  the  continuation  of  ships  already 
under  construction,  and  £750,000  in  beginning  work  on  ships  of 
the  new  programme,  which  is  composed  as  follows  : — 

1  Battleship  (improved  Dreadnought  class)  ; 
1  Large  Armoured  Cruiser  ; 
6  Fast  Protected  Cruisers  ; 
16  Torpedo  Boat  Destroyers  ; 

and  a  number  of  Submarine  Boats  estimated  to  cost  £500,000  in 

This  programme  suffices  for  1908-9  ;  whether  and  to  what 
extent  it  may  be  necessary  to  enlarge  it  next  year,  or  in  future 
years,  must  depend  upon  the  additions  made  to  their  naval  force 
by  Foreign  Powers.  His  Majesty's  Government  have  every 
intention  of  maintaining  the  standard  of  the  British  Navy  which 
has  hitherto  been  deemed  necessary  for  the  safeguarding  of  our 
national  and  Imperial  interests. 

Between  the  1st  April,  1907,  and  the  31st  March,  1908,  the 
following  ships  will  have  been  completed  and  become  available 
for  service  : — 

1  Battleship  (Lord  Nelson). 

3  Armoured  Cruisers  (Warrior,  Shannon,  and  Minotaur). 
P.W.  K 


3  Torpedo  Boat  Destroyers  (Cossack,  Mohawk,  and  Tartar). 
10  Torpedo  Boats  (of  the  Coastal  Destroyer  type). 

8  Submarines. 

1  Repair  Ship  (Cyclops)  and  the  New  Royal  Yacht  Alex- 

On  the  1st  April,  1908,  there  will  be  under  construction  : — 
7  Battleships. 

4  Armoured  Cruisers. 

1  Unarmoured  Cruiser. 
10  Torpedo  Boat  Destroyers. 
20  Torpedo  Boats  (of  the  Coastal  Destroyer  type). 
18  Submarines. 

This  year  again  there  has  been  some  delay  in  the  completion 
of  contract-built  ships,  owing  to  labour  disputes  between 
employers  and  their  men  in  the  private  shipbuilding  yards. 
A  continuance  of  this  delay  may  involve  a  modification  in  the 
numbers  of  ships  given  above. 

Several  incidents  occurred  early  in  1907  which  gave  us  cause 
to  suspect  that  the  method  of  storing  cordite  in  magazines  on 
board  ship  required  alteration,  in  order  to  meet  certain  dangers 
that  had  been  discovered  to  arise  from  cordite  which  is  exposed 
to  a  high  temperature.  The  matter  did  not  admit  of  delay,  and 
the  Admiralty  decided,  with  the  approval  of  a  strong  scientific 
committee,  presided  over  by  Lord  Rayleigh,  to  fit  the  cordite 
magazines  with  cooling  apparatus,  and  to  destroy  all  cordite  that 
had  been  long  in  a  hot  climate.  The  cooling  apparatus  is 
expensive,  and  the  work  when  completed  will  have  cost  £500,000 ; 
but  the  necessity  for  dealing  promptly  with  the  danger  will  not 
need  further  statement.  The  progress  on  this  work  has  been 
very  prompt  and  satisfactory,  and  the  amount  estimated  for  it 
during  the  year  will  be  fully  spent.  It  has  necessitated  an 
increase  in  the  numbers  of  men  employed  in  the  dockyards,  and 
a  slight  further  increase  was  also  necessary  to  deal  with  the 
large  number  of  casualties  to  torpedo  craft  and  other  vessels 
after  the  Fleet  Exercises  had  terminated.  The  remedy  of  these 
defects  is  nearing  completion  and  the  present  progress  of  repairs 
is  now  in  a  normal  and  satisfactory  condition. 

The  cost  of  maintaining  the  torpedo  craft  in  an  efficient  con- 
dition is  increasing  as  the  vessels  get  older,  and  many  of  them 
are  due  for  large  boiler  repairs  during  the  present  year.  Before 
carrying  out  this  work  in  the  older  ones,  a  careful  survey  will  be 
made  to  ensure  that  they  are  worth  this  expenditure.  The 
increasing  power  of  machinery  and  boilers,  due  to  the  higher 
speeds  adopted  during  the  past  decade,  is  also  throwing  an 
increasing  share  of  repair  work  on  the  engineering  side  of  the 


dockyards  and  necessitating  an  increase  in  the  numbers  of  men 
therein  employed,  though  no  corresponding  increase  is  required 
on  the  constructive  side  at  present.  Although  no  important 
reconstructive  work  is  contemplated,  many  minor  but  very 
important  alterations  are  being  carried  out  gradually  with 
the  object  of  improving  the  general  fighting  efficiency  of  the 
Fleet.  Wireless  telegraphy  is  being  adopted  in  most  of  the 
later  destroyers,  and  the  improvements  in  the  system  adopted  in 
our  big  ships  have  required  constructive  alterations  in  them  to 
enable  the  instruments  to  be  fitted.  These  alterations  require 
considerable  time  and  money  to  carry  out,  in  view  of  the  great 
number  of  vessels  involved. 

Excellent  work  continues  to  be  done  by  repair  ships  and  the 
artificers  of  the  Fleet  in  correcting  small  defects,  which  might 
otherwise  develop  to  such  an  extent  as  to  necessitate  dockyard 
assistance  before  the  annual  refit  was  due  ;  but,  nevertheless,  for 
the  reasons  I  have  given  above,  an  increased  provision  of  £700,000 
for  repairs  is  needed  for  the  coming  year. 

We  have  begun  to  build  submarines  in  the  Royal  Dockyards, 
a  step  which,  besides  affording  desirable  work  to  them,  will  be 
a  check  on  contract  prices. 

The  Admiralty  have  come  to  an  arrangement  with  the 
armour-plate  manufacturers  for  a  considerable  reduction  in  the 
price  which  is  paid  for  armour  plates,  and  this  will  take  effect 
in  the  construction  of  the  new  armoured  ships  of  the  current 
year's  programme. 


A  review  of  the  memoranda  issued  by  the  Admiralty  during 
the  last  few  years  discloses  a  series  of  important  changes  and 
alterations  affecting  all  branches  of  His  Majesty's  Naval  Service. 
These  are  all,  in  my  opinion,  entirely  well  conceived  and 
salutary.  Time  is  now  required  for  the  Service  to  digest  and 
assimilate  the  new  arrangements,  and  caution  will,  therefore, 
be  used  in  bringing  forward  further  schemes  at  present. 

Under  the  nucleus  crew  system,  the  chief  executive  officers 
and  more  important  ratings  are  always  on  board  the  ships  ; 
from  time  to  time  the  crews  are  made  up  to  full  complement  and 
are  given  seagoing  practice  ;  the  boilers  and  machinery  are 
always  maintained  in  good  order,  so  as  to  be  ready  for  sudden 

The  rapidity  and  certainty  with  which  the  nucleus  crew  ships 
can  be  fully  manned  has  been  illustrated  signally  by  the  recent 
exercises  of  mobilization  at  Devonport,  Portsmouth,  and 

It  has  been  alleged  that  the  Admiralty  have  no  war  plans 


properly  worked  out,  nor  strategical  operations  thoroughly 
elaborated  ;  this  is  a  baseless  allegation.  Such  plans  are  in  the 
possession  of  the  Admiralty  in  abundant  number  to  meet  all 
probable  emergencies.  The  details  of  these  plans  cannot  of 
course  be  made  public,  for  their  successful  operation  in  actual 
warfare  must  largely  depend  upon  their  secrecy. 

The  new  disposition  of  the  Atlantic  Fleet  with  its  base  at 
Berehaven  and  its  repairing  dockyard  at  Gibraltar,  and  the 
development  of  the  Home  Fleet  have  been  notable  examples  of 
the  progress  of  the  last  two  years.  The  fully  manned  portion  of 
this  Fleet  at  present  has  its  base  at  the  Nore,  and  is  now  in 
full  working  order,  though  not  yet  up  to  its  intended  full 
strength.  It  will  consist  this  summer  of  twelve  of  the  latest 
battleships  and  armoured  cruisers,  with  destroyer  and  submarine 
flotillas  attached,  and  the  nucleus  crew  ships  at  the  three  Home 
Ports  ready  for  rapid  mobilization. 

The  remarkable  results  which  have  during  the  last  year  been 
returned  of  the  gunnery  practice  carried  out  by  our  Fleets  and 
ships  all  over  the  world,  are  facts  of  great  interest  and  worthy 
of  congratulation.  The  reports  of  the  efficiency  which  signal- 
ling has  reached  in  the  Naval  Service,  whether  by  the  older 
systems  or  by  electric  and  wireless  telegraphic  installations,  are 
very  satisfactory  and  speak  very  highly  for  the  intelligence  and 
hard  work  of  the  officers  and  men  who  take  charge  of  this 
important  part  of  the  service  of  the  sea. 

The  new  system  of  entry,  training  and  education  for  all 
classes  of  officers  in  the  Navy — executive,  engineers  and  marines 
— instituted  a  little  more  than  four  years  ago,  is  yielding  good 
results.  The  first  two  batches  of  Cadets  are  now  serving  in  the 
training  cruisers  Cumberland  and  Cornwall. 

After  six  months'  service  in  these  cruisers,  they  will  be  drafted 
to  ships  in  the  seagoing  fleets,  the  first  batch  going  to  sea  in 
April.  In  the  fleets  they  will  be  trained  in  a  practical  way  as 
Naval  officers,  and  after  three  years  they  will  be  examined  in 
Seamanship,  Navigation  and  Pilotage,  Gunnery,  Torpedo,  and 
Engineering,  and  in  certain  optional  subjects,  such  as  Mathe- 
matics, Mechanics,  Electricity,  Languages,  and  History,  the 
study  of  which  at  sea  will  be  voluntary.  After  passing  the 
examinations  in  the  above  subjects,  they  will  become  Sub- 
Lieutenants  and  remain  at  sea,  receiving  their,  promotion  to 
Lieutenant  according  to  the  results  of  their  examination.  After 
serving  at  least  two  years  at  sea  as  Sub-Lieutenant  and 
Lieutenant,  a  certain  proportion  will  be  selected  to  qualify 
in  the  separate  specialist  branches  of  the  Service,  in  preparation 
for  which  they  will  then  undergo  courses  at  the  Eoyal  Naval 
College,  Greenwich,  and  the  specialist  schools. 


The  officers  will  thus  serve  for  5^  years  continuously  at  sea 
before  they  can  specialize. 

The  Interview  Committees  which,  since  taking  office,  I  have 
appointed  to  report  on  the  respective  qualifications  of  the 
candidates  for  entry  as  Naval  Cadets,  have  included  Admirals 
of  the  Fleet  Lord  Walter  Kerr  and  Sir  Edward  Seymour, 
Admirals  Sir  Archibald  Douglas  and  Sir  Arthur  Fanshawe, 
Vice-Admiral  Sir  John  Durnford,  the  Right  Hon.  Arthur 
Acland,  Mr.  A.  C.  Benson,  and  the  Headmasters  of  Maryborough, 
Wellington,  Radley,  and  Dartmouth.  Their  reports  to  me  have 
revealed  a  most  satisfactory  unanimity  of  opinion  as  to  the 
value  and  success  of  this  method  of  differentiating  between  the 
merits  of  boys  of  the  young  age  of  twelve  years. 


A  reform  long  advocated  by  Naval  officers  has  been  carried 
out  this  year  by  the  transfer  of  the  work  of  making  contracts 
for  Naval  guns  and  Ordnance  stores  from  the  War  Office  to  the 
Admiralty,  and  by  the  creation  of  a  Naval  Ordnance  Inspection 
Department.  The  Admiralty,  therefore,  now  for  the  first  time 
have  direct  control  and  responsibility  for  the  manufacture  and 
supply  of  the  guns  and  ammunition  of  the  Fleet.  The  Army 
Inspection  officers  have  done  the  work  for  the  Admiralty  with 
great  ability  in  the  past,  but  the  growing  divergence  in  pattern 
between  the  Stores  required  by  the  two  Services  and  the 
necessity  for  the  rapid  expansion  of  the  supply  in  war  time,  a 
requirement  for  which  the  War  Office  Staff  were  admittedly 
unable  to  provide,  rendered  the  change  inevitable. 

I  am  glad  to  be  able  to  report  that  the  London  County 
Council  have  accepted  the  solution  of  the  difficulty  with  regar*d 
to  the  interference  of  their  electric  generating  station  with 
Greenwich  Observatory,  to  which  I  referred  in  my  statement 
last  year. 

The  Admiralty  Office  has  lost  through  retirement  several  of 
its  Heads  of  Departments.  Engineer  Vice-Admiral  Sir  John 
Durston,  K.C.B.,  for  many  years  Engineer-in-Chief  of  the 
Navy,  and  the  first  holder  of  his  present  rank,  has  had  a 
unique  experience  in  the  superintendence  of  the  development 
of  steam  machinery  in  the  Fleet.  Well-deserved  praise  was 
awarded  to  the  Transport  Department  by  the  South  African 
War  Commission  for  its  work  during  that  campaign.  Vice- 
Admiral  Sir  George  Boyes,  K.C.B.,  who  became  Director  while 
the  war  was  in  progress,  and  Mr.  Stephen  Graff,  C.B.,  who  was 
Civil  Head  of  the  Department  throughout,  have  both  retired 
this  year. 

The  labours  of  the  Malta  Fever  Commissioners  have  during 


the  past  year  been  brought  to  a  successful  termination.  They 
have  made  the  discovery  that  the  milk  of  the  goat  is  the  chief 
medium  by  which  the  bacillus  of  Malta  fever  gains  access  to  the 
human  body.  We  hope  that  in  future  this  disease,  which  in 
the  past  has  committed  such  ravages  among  the  crews  of  vessels 
serving  on  the  Mediterranean  Station,  will  entirely  be  banished. 
Since  this  discovery  was  made,  and  the  use  of  goat's  milk  was 
forbidden  to  our  seamen  and  marines,  Malta  fever  has  practi- 
cally disappeared  from  among  them.  The  Commission,  working 
under  the  aegis  of  the  Royal  Society,  was  composed  of  Naval, 
Military,  and  Colonial  medical  officers  under  the  chairmanship 
of  Colonel  Bruce,  C.B.,  F.R.S.,  and  their  patient  and  skilled 
investigations  merit  the  highest  praise.  Fleet  Surgeons  Shaw 
and  Clayton,  who  represented  the  Navy  on  the  inquiry,  con- 
tributed not  a  little  to  the  result. 


The  War  Course  College  at  Portsmouth,  re-named  the  Royal 
Naval  War  College,  has  now  been  placed  under  the  command  of 
a  Flag  officer — Rear-Admiral  Robert  Lowry— with  an  increased 
staff  of  assistants,  and  work  of  the  greatest  value  is  now  being 
carried  out  there,  in  close  connexion  with  the  Naval  Intelligence 
Department,  whose  Director,  Captain  Sir  Charles  Ottley, 
K.C.M.G,  has,  on  appointment  as  Secretary  of  the  Imperial 
Defence  Committee,  been  succeeded  by  Captain  Edmond  Slade, 
hitherto  Superintendent  of  the  War  Course  College. 

The  report  of  the  inter-departmental  Conference  on  the 
subject  of  the  present  administration  of  the  Coast  Guard 
service,  to  which  reference  was  made  last  year,  has  been 
received,  and  has  been  under  consideration  by  the  various 
Departments  concerned.  The  effect  of  the  policy  upon  which 
the  report  was  based  would  be  to  bring  about  a  material  change 
in  the  relations  of  the  Admiralty,  Board  of  Customs,  and  Board 
of  Trade  in  regard  to  the  carrying  out  of  various  services  which 
have  gradually  been  undertaken  by  the  Coast  Guard  during  the 
fifty  years  that  it  has  been  directly  under  the  Admiralty  ;  and 
looking  to  the  many  issues  involved,  the  Board  of  Admiralty 
recognised  that  the  change  proposed  could  not  take  place 
without  very  careful  consideration.  Accordingly  it  was  decided 
that  no  attempt  should  be  made  to  provide  for  any  new  policy 
as  regards  the  administration  of  the  Coast  Guard  in  connexion 
with  the  preparation  of  the  Estimates  for  1908-09. 

The  new  Victualling  and  Canteen  arrangements,  based  upon 
the  recommendations  of  a  Committee  presided  over  by  Rear- 
Admiral  Spencer  H.  M.  Login,  C.V.O.,  whose  report  has  already 
been  presented  to  Parliament,  came  into  operation  on  the 


1st  October  last,  except  on  some  of  the  more  distant  Stations, 
where  the  change  was  deferred  until  the  1st  January.  All  the 
reports  received  are  to  the  effect  that  the  new  arrangements  are 
working  smoothly  and  satisfactorily.  The  new  victualling 
s^isteni  is,  practically  everywhere,  resulting  in  economy  to  the 
men,  partly  because  the  substitution  of  a  fixed  daily  messing 
allowance  for  the  varying  amount  formerly  received  under  the 
complicated  "savings  system"  enables  them  to  keep  closely  in 
touch  with  their  expenditure  from  day  to  day,  and  partly  on 
account  of  the  facilities  now  given  to  the  messes  for  purchasing 
many  articles  of  food  for  use  on  board  ship  from  Government 
stocks  and  at  Government  prices.  The  new  Canteen  system, 
under  which  the  Admiralty  exercise  general  supervision  over 
the  Canteen  arrangements  throughout  the  Fleet,  and  furnish 
Commanding  Officers  with  official  information  and  assistance  in 
connexion  with  Canteen  matters,  is  also  working  well,  and 
seems  likely  to  have  a  very  beneficial  effect  in  many  ways. 

As  a  result  of  the  deliberations  of  a  Committee  on  Pay  and 
Allowances  of  Seamen  of  the  Fleet,  new  regulations  have  been 
issued  which  will  tend  to  improve  the  fitness  and  disciplinary 
position  of  the  Petty  Officers  of  the  Royal  Navy,  and  will 
ensure  a  higher  standard  of  general  efficiency  among  the  more 
important  ratings. 

The  annual  battle  practice  is  steadily  training  the  Fleet  for 
the  firing  conditions  which  would  be  met  with  in  action.  Each 
year  our  experience  gained  increases  our  knowledge  of  the 
practical  means  of  developing  the  fire  of  our  ships,  and  we  are 
continuing  to  make  progress  in  the  direction  of  imitating  more 
closely  the  actual  conditions  of  battle.  It  is  difficult  to 
appreciate  the  revolution  in  Naval  gunnery  which  has  taken 
place  in  the  last  few  years,  and  the  labour  and  patience  required 
in  introducing  large  changes  throughout  a  great  S.ervice  like 
the  Navy.  The  results  obtained  this  year  have  shown  that  a 
sound  knowledge  of  long-range  shooting  has  thoroughly  per- 
meated the  Fleet.  We  are  therefore  able  from  the  experience 
gained  to  take  next  year  several  important  steps  as  regards 
both  this  practice  and  additional  fittings  to  the  ships.  Every 
endeavour  is  being  made  to  assimilate  our  methods  to  war 
conditions,  but  while  we  are  steadily  developing,  there  is  no 
reason  to  disparage  our  present  results,  which  undoubtedly 
afford  great  proof  of  the  gunnery  efficiency  of  our  various  ships 
and  Fleets,  and  give  a  measure  of  their  capabilities  in  action. 

In  the  four  principal  Fleets  the  recording  of  the  results  was 
placed  in  the  hands  of  an  independent  committee,  under  the 
Inspector  of  Target  Practice,  to  ensure  a  uniform  method  of 
assessing  the  number  of  hits  obtained  by  each  ship. 



After  negotiations  extending  over  a  good  many  months,  a 
site  has  been  feued  on  the  west  shore  of  Loch  Long  for  the 
establishment  of  a  Torpedo  Range  of  7,000  yards  length,  and 
another  has  been  purchased  at  Greenock  for  a  Torpedo  Factory, 
whence  these  weapons  can  readily  be  conveyed  to  the  range  for 
trial.  The  rapid  increase  in  recent  years  of  the  speed  and  the 
range  of  action  of  the  Whitehead  Torpedo  has  rendered  the 
existing  ranges  at  Portsmouth  and  Weymouth  wholly  inadequate 
for  their  purpose,  and  a  thorough  survey  of  the  coasts  of  the 
United  Kingdom  resulted  in  the  selection  of  Loch  Long  as  the 
place  which  would  best  comply  with  all  the  conditions  required. 
Visitors  to  this  part  of  Scotland  need  be  under  no  apprehension 
that  the  beauties  of  the  scenery  or  the  convenience  of  access 
will  be  interfered  with. 

The  Admiralty  property  at  Rosyth,  consisting  of  1,184  1-5 
acres,  with  285  acres  of  foreshore,  was  purchased  in  1903-4  for 
the  construction  of  a  new  Naval  base  on  the  east  coast.  In 
the  interval,  since  the  completion  of  the  purchase,  the  Superin- 
tending Engineer  appointed  in  charge  of  Rosyth  has  made  an 
extensive  survey  of  all  the  great  Naval  establishments  and 
building  yards  at  home  and  of  some  abroad,  in  order  that  plans 
might  be  drawn  for  the  laying  out  of  Rosyth  as  a  first-class 
Naval  base  in  such  a  way  that  any  particular  portion  might  be 
carried  out  without  interference  with  the  general  scheme;  the 
intention  was  to  avoid  the  repetition  of  the  haphazard  growth 
of  a  Naval  dockyard  port,  which  the  history  of  the  old  establish- 
ments at  Portsmouth,  Devonport,  and  Chatham  has  proved  to 
be  so  expensive  in  the  past.  The  general  scheme  having  been 
drawn  up,  the  present  Board  of  Admiralty  have  decided  to  take 
in  hand  the  construction  of  a  graving  dock,  closed  basin,  and  an 
entrance  lock,  capable  of  accommodating  the  largest  modern 
warships,  with  a  depot  for  submarines  and  destroyers,  and 
provision  for  oil  fuel  storage.  The  basin  is  to  be  52£  acres  in 
area,  with  accommodation  for  11  of  the  largest  ships  along  the 
quays,  or  22  when  double  banked. 

During  the  past  year  the  preliminary  borings  have  been 
completed,  and  detailed  contract  plans  are  now  being  prepared. 

This  part  of  the  general  scheme,  for  which  the  contract  will 
shortly  be  let,  is  estimated  to  cost  £3,000,000  for  work  and 
£250,000  for  machinery— the  whole  to  be  completed  in  about 
10  years. 

The  necessity  for  this  work  is  apparent  when  it  is  remembered 
that  there  is  no  Government  dockyard  capable  of  taking  ships 
of  the  Dreadnought  class  along  the  whole  of  the  east  coast  of 
Great  Britain. 



The  appropriations  in  aid  of  the  Navy  Estimates  which 
are  contributed  by  the  various  self-governing  Colonies  are  the 
same  as  in  last  year's  Estimates.  The  discussions  at  the  Confer- 
ence with  the  Colonial  Ministers  last  spring  revealed  the  fact 
that  there  was  a  certain  desire  on  the  part  of  some  of  the 
Colonial  Governments  for  the  establishment  of  local  defence 
flotillas  in  lieu  of,  or  as  supplementary  to,  the  present  money 
contributions  to  the  Imperial  Exchequer. 

The  Admiralty,  while  not  desiring  to  withdraw  from  the 
existing  agreements  and  arrangements,  recognised  that  it  was 
only  natural  that  the  Colonies  should  sooner  or  later  desire  to 
have  defence  forces  of  their  own,  and  consequently  we  announced 
our  readiness  to  meet  the  wishes  of  the  Colonial  Governments  as 
far  as  possible,  and  to  consider  any  alternative  schemes  which 
they  might  put  forward. 

The  Prime  Minister  of  the  Australian  Commonwealth  has 
communicated  to  the  Admiralty  the  outline  of  a  scheme  for  the 
establishment  of  a  local  flotilla  of  destroyers  and  submarines, 
which  is  now  under  consideration.  The  Cape  and  Natal  Govern- 
ments have  initiated  legislation  with  the  object  of  establishing 
divisions  of  the  Eoyal  Naval  Volunteer  Keserve  in  Cape  Colony 
and  Natal,  and  the  Legislature  of  the  latter  Colony  has  passed 
an  Act  for  the  purpose. 


A  report  of  the  conclusions  of  the  second  International  Con- 
ference at  The  Hague  has  been  presented  to  Parliament  in  a 
recent  Blue-book.  The  action  to  be  taken  in  regard  to  the 
various  conventions  is  now  engaging  the  consideration  of  the 
Government,  and  the  Board  of  Admiralty  are  giving  special 
attention  to  those  conventions  which  immediately  concern  the 
operations  of  the  Fleet,  and  particularly  to  the  convention  for 
the  establishment  of  an  International  Court  of  Appeal  in  Prize 
cases.  From  a  Naval  point  of  view  it  is  important  that  there 
should  be  an  agreement  as  to  the  principles  of  International 
Law  which  should  govern  the  decisions  of  an  International 
Court  in  matters  such  as  contraband  and  blockade. 


The  distribution  of  the  Fleet  has  undergone  no  material 
alteration.  The  development  of  the  Home  Fleet  is  steadily 
proceeding  and  by  degrees  approaching  its  desired  standard  of 

In  August  last  two  armoured  cruisers  were  added  to  the  First 


Cruiser  Squadron,  and  24  destroyers,  forming  a  .  "Western 
Group"  based  on  Portland,  were  placed  permanently  under  the 
orders  of  the  Conimander-in-Chief  of  the  Channel  Fleet.  More 
recently  six  nucleus  crew  destroyers  have  been  added  to  this 
group,  with  the  object  of  forming  a  reserve  at  Portland,  and  so 
rendering  the  group  as  far  as  possible  self-contained. 

The  Channel  Fleet  has  had  its  quota  of  destroyers  brought  up 
to  thirty,  and  the  Battle  Squadron  k  being  strengthened  by 
the  substitution  of  six  of  the  Bulwark  type  for  older  vessels, 
so  that  it  will  in  future  consist  of  eight  King  Edwards  and 
six  Bulwarks. 

It  has  recently  been  decided  to  appropriate  permanently  the 
Shearwater  and  Algerine  for  Service  on  the  West  Coast  of 
America,  the  Algerine  being  transferred  from  the  China 
Station.  These  two  vessels  will  be  available  for  the  Bearing 
Sea  patrol  and  also  for  occasional  visits  to  the  Pacific  Islands. 

An  inter-departmental  Conference,  under  the  presidency  of 
Vice- Admiral  Sir  Reginald  Henderson,  commanding  the  Coast 
Guard  and  Reserves,  has  been  sitting  to  consider  the  general 
question  of  the  protection  to  be  afforded  by  the  Navy  to  the 
fishery  interests  in  the  seas  surrounding  the  British  Isles,  which 
involves  also  the  question  of  Revenue  protection  afloat. 

I  append  the  usual  statement  of  work  done  in  the  Depart- 

llth  February,  1908.  TWEEDMOUTH. 

EXERCISE  No.  8. 


No.  1.       Sir  C.  Phipps  to  the  Marquess  of  Lansdowne. 
(Received  November  8.) 

Brussels,  November  7,  1905. 

MY  LORD, — I  have  the  honour  to  inclose  copies  of  the  Congo 
Bulletin  Officiel  for  September-October  which  reached  me  this 
morning  containing  the  Report  of  the  Congo  Commission  of 

In  spite  of  the  reserved  and  dignified  tone  which  pervades  the 
whole  Report,  it  contains  the  most  scathing  criticisms  of  the 


policy  pursued  in  the  Congo  State.  Proof  is  afforded  that  the 
Commissioners  were  fully  alive  to  the  responsibilities  of  the  task 
which  they  assumed  ;  whilst  the  fears  which  were  expressed  in 
some  quarters  that  the  Report  would  be  optimistic,  or  that  they 
would  palliate  or  defend  any  of  the  unquestionable  infractions 
of  the  law  which  occurred,  are  now  proved,  as  I  anticipated,  to 
be  entirely  unjustified. 

Adopting  the  divisions  of  their  task  enumerated  by  the  Com- 
missioners on  p.  149  of  the  Report,  the  most  striking  conclusions 
appear  to  me  to  be  the  following  : — 


Whilst  not  contesting  the  legality  of  the  appropriation  by  the 
State  of  vacant  lands,  it  is  pointed  out  that  in  practice  the  State 
has  monopolised  the  entire  fruits  of  the  soil,  and  has  interfered 
with  the  whole  evolution  of  native  existence.  It  has  failed  to 
give  a  liberal  and  wide  interpretation  to  the  Laws  of  1885  and 
1886,  which  conferred  on  the  native  population  the  free  enjoy- 
ment of  the  zones  of  territory  adjoining  their  huts  under  the 
authority  of  their  chiefs,  enabling  them  to  trade  in  the  produce 
of  such  zones.  This  Law  had  become  a  dead  letter. 

The  course  thus  pursued  is,  on  p.  153,  contrasted  with  the 
practice  invariably  followed  in  the  neighbouring  French  colony. 
The  system  of  exchangeable  value  adopted  is  strongly  criticised, 
and  the  introduction  of  specie  payments  suggested. 


In  this  extended  chapter  the  entire  system  pursued  in  these 
respects  is  subjected  to  severe  condemnation,  although  it  is 
argued  forcibly  that  payment  by  means  of  labour  is  the  only 
possible  tax  to  which  the  native  can  be  subjected.  The  irregu- 
larities pursued  in  the  system  of  enforcing  labour  are  brought 
into  strong  relief,  as  well  as  the  undue  latitude  allowed  to  local 
officials,  who  could,  in  practice,  apparently  make  use  of  any  form 
of  coercion  they  chose  to  adopt. 

The  defects  in  the  Law  of  the  18th  November,  1903,  by  which 
forty  hours  of  labour  per  month  are  imposed  on  the  natives,  are 
pointed  out,  and  the  different  imposts  due  by  the  natives  are 
reviewed.  The  existing  system  of  coercion  is  examined,  and, 
though  the  maximum  of  such  coercion  is  nominally  fixed  at  one 
month's  imprisonment,  the  agent  is,  in  practice,  left  to  act  much 
as  he  chooses. 

The  sentinel  system,  as  well  as  that  of  the  "capitas,"  is  strongly 
condemned,  and  the  accusations  brought  against  the  sentinels, 


though  not  in  all  cases  proved,  are  regarded  as  well  founded. 
The  whole  system  is  shown  to  result  in  constant  warfare  between 
the  rubber-collecting  natives  and  the  sentinels,  the  A.B.I.R. 
Company  proving  that  142  of  the  latter  had  been  killed  or 
wounded  within  seven  months,  owing  to  the  natives'  retaliation 
against  the  cruelties  which  they  had  perpetrated.  In  short,  the 
entire  chapter  proves  the  administration  of  the  A.B.I.R.  Com- 
pany to  be  a  system  of  hardly  restricted  savagery,  and  illustrates 
the  fact  that  the  apparently  carefully  devised  Regulations  which 
the  Directors  in  Europe  believe  to  be  carried  into  execution  are 
entirely  set  at  naught. 

The  Commission  recommends  a  resort  to  the  system  of  "  impdt 
collectif  "  under  the  control  of  the  native  chiefs,  but  it  is  impos- 
sible to  believe,  after  a  perusal  of  the  details  given,  that  such  a 
Company  can  be  permitted  to  exist  any  longer. 


This  chapter  again  severely  condemns  the  entire  system  pur- 
sued by  the  Companies,  and  proves  the  action  adopted  by  these 
to  be  a  distinct  infraction  of  the  law.  The  State  police  afforded 
by  the  Government  is  declared  to  be  utilised  by  the  Companies 
to  enforce  their  own  pecuniary  interests,  and  to  involve  the  com- 
mission of  the  most  terrible  cruelties. 

In  regard  to  actual  mutilations,  the  defenders  of  the  Congo 
system  are  able  to  appeal  to  one  paragraph  of  the  Report  in 
refutation  of  the  accusations  so  generally  brought  against  them. 

The  Commissioners  declare  that,  with  the  exception  of  two 
cases  in  which  mutilation  was  voluntarily  inflicted  on  living 
natives,  such  has  never  been  inflicted  wilfully. 

"  Never  has  a  white  man  inflicted,  or  caused  to  be  inflicted,  as 
punishment  for  shortage  of  rubber  or  of  other  prestations 
mutilations  on  living  natives.  No  such  acts  have  ever  been 
averred  by  any  witness,  nor  have  we  ever,  in  spite  of  all  our 
investigations,  discovered  that  such  acts  have  been  committed." 


This  is  strongly  condemned  on  pp.  226-236,  and  it  is  recom- 
mended that  the  system  of  free  commerce  should  be  put  on  its 
trial,  the  State  abandoning  its  "  incontestable "  rights  to  the 
produce  of  the  soil. 


The  causes  put  forward  by  the  missionaries  are  declared  to  be 
difficult  to  establish,  and  to  be  secondary  ones,  the  primary 
causes  being  small-pox  and  sleeping  sickness. 



The  system  of  State  instruction  in  colonies  is  examined,  and 
cogent  reasons  given  for  condemning  it.  The  system  pursued  by 
the  Catholic  and  Protestant  Missions  is  also  declared  faulty. 

A  dangerous  and  somewhat  surprising  suggestion  is  made  at 
the  conclusion  of  this  chapter,  viz.,  that  native  parents  may  be 
allowed,  if  desirous  to  do  so,  to  dispense  their  children  from 
religious  instruction. 


The  system  is  in  general  defended,  and  military  education  and 
service  is  regarded  as  an  important  element  of  civilisation,  such 
service  not  being  distasteful  to  the  negro,  but  exercising  rather 
a  humanising  effect.  It  is  explained  on  pp.  253-254  that,  unable 
any  longer  to  engage  West  Coast  natives,  the  State  has  to  recruit 
from  the  more  hardy,  warlike  tribes  of  the  Upper  Congo,  who 
are  mainly  cannibals.  Amongst  such  elements  the  firm  dis- 
cipline recommended  by  the  Commission  can  alone  prevent  the 
reawakening  of  the  but  dormant  instincts  of  savagery. 

The  whole  system  of  labour  contracts  is  carefully  reviewed 
on  pp.  254-264,  the  Law  of  1888  being  declared  to  be  a  most 
praiseworthy  one.  In  the  Lower  Congo  its  provisions  are 
(contrary  to  the  experience  of  our  Consuls)  declared  to  be 
executed.  In  the  Upper  Congo  it  is  admitted  that  neither  the 
letter  of  the  Law  nor  the  intentions  of  the  legislator,  are 

The  whole  organisation  and  conditions  of  contract  labour  are, 
it  is  clearly  proved,  faulty. 


From  p.  265  to  p.  279  the  entire  judicial  organisation  is  so 
ably  and  succinctly  exposed  that  it  is  impossible  to  convey  the 
explanation  by  any  abridgment.  Its  inconvenience,  both  to 
suitors,  criminal  witnesses,  and  to  public  security,  are  detailed, 
and  it  is  observed  at  the  conclusion  of  the  chapter  that  whilst 
the  law  surrounds  individual  liberty  with  important  guarantees, 
the  action  of  administrative  authority  is  left,  so  to  speak, 
without  restriction  or  control. 

The  concluding  paragraphs  of  the  Report,  from  p.  279  to  p. 
285,  explaining  how  entirely  the  conditions  attending  national 
life  in  the  Congo  State  differ  from  those  prevalent  in  other 
portions  of  Africa,  should  be  read  in  their  entirety,  and  whilst 
they  to  some  extent  seek  to  palliate  and  account  for  existing 
abuses,  proof  is  afforded  how  drastic  and  sweeping  must  be 


the  changes  which  the  newly-appointed  Executive  Commission 
must  introduce. 

This  Commission  of  fourteen  members  is  named  by  Royal 
Decree  on  the  proposal  of  the  three  Secretaries-General  "  to  study 
the  conclusions  of  the  Inquiry  Commission  Report,  to  formulate 
the  proposals  which  they  may  necessitate,  and  to  discover  the 
practical  means  of  realising  them." 

The  President,  M.  de  Maldeghem,  is  second  President  of  the 
Court  of  Cassation,  and  his  nomination  may  be  regarded  as 

Amongst  the  Commission  are  M.  Janssens,  the  President  of 
the  Inquiry  Commission,  the  three  Secretaries-General,  two 
"  Commissaires  de  District "  "in  the  Congo,  a  Belgian  Deputy, 
Colonel  Five,  of  the  Guides,  M.  de  Hemptinne,  President  of  the 
Kassai  Company,  M.  Mols,  and  M.  Nys,  the  Publicist,  Member 
of  the  Hague  Court  of  Arbitration. 

I  have,  etc. 
(Signed)        CONSTANTINE  PHIPPS. 

No.  2.  Sir  Edward  Grey  to  Sir  C.  Phipps. 

Foreign  Office,  January  9,  1906. 

SIR, — I  have  had  under  my  consideration  your  dispatch  of 
the  7th  November,  in  which  you  forward  the  Report  of  the 
Commission  appointed  to  inquire  into  the  charges  made  against 
the  Administration  of  the  Independent  State  of  the  Congo  in 
regard  to  the  treatment  of  natives. 

This  document  has  been  attentively  examined  by  His 
Majesty's  Government,  and  they  desire  to  express  their  sense 
of  the  manner  in  which  the  Commissioners  have  discharged  the 
onerous  duty  intrusted  to  them. 

Owing  to  the  fact  that  it  was  not  until  the  llth  December — 
when  the  Commission  had  already  reached  the  La  Lulonga  and 
A.B.I.R.  districts — that  His  Majesty's  Government  received  the 
intimation  that  there  would  be  no  objection  to  the  presence  of 
their  Representative  at  the  proceedings  of  the  Commission,  it 
was  possible  for  the  Consular  officer  designated  in  this  capacity 
to  attend  only  a  small  number  of  the  sittings  held  during  the 
return  journey  to  Boma.  His  Majesty's  Government,  however, 
while  regretting  the  impossibility  of  obtaining  from  their  own 
Representative  precise  information  in  regard  to  the  nature  of 
the  statements  made  by  the  witnesses  before  the  Commission, 
attached  the  less  importance  to  the  matter,  as  they  fully 
expected  to  be  placed  in  possession  of  an  authoritative  account 
of  the  proceedings  when  the  Report  of  the  Commission  should 


be  made  public.  It  was,  therefore,  with  much  regret  and 
surprise  that  His  Majesty's  Government  found  that  the  Report 
was  published  without  the  evidence.  I  have  to  request  you  to 
call  the  special  attention  of  the  Congo  Government  to  this 
point,  and  to  urge  upon  them  the  view  always  held  by  His 
Majesty's  Government,  that  the  fullest  publicity  should  be  given 
to  the  proceedings  of  the  Commission. 

It  appears  from  the  introductory  remarks  of  the  Report  that 
the  investigations  of  the  Commission  in  the  Upper  Congo  lasted 
from  the  1st  November,  1904,  to  the  26th  January,  1905— a 
period  of  less  than  three  months.  His  Majesty's  Government 
had  anticipated  that  more  time  would  have  been  devoted  to  the 
examination  of  the  grievances  of  the  natives,  and  that  the 
personal  investigations  of  the  Commission  would  have  extended 
to  the  remoter  districts  of  the  State.  That  these  anticipations 
were  not  realised  is,  however,  His  Majesty's  Government 
believe,  due  not  to  any  failure  on  the  part  of  the  Commissioners 
to  realise  the  importance  of  collecting  the  fullest  information, 
but  to  their  conviction  that  the  results  of  their  inquiries  in  the 
districts  visited  by  them  were  of  a  representative  character  and 
afforded  a  sufficient  basis  for  the  conclusions  at  which  they  had 

The  Commission  of  Inquiry  has  confirmed  the  statements  made 
in  Consul  Casement's  Report  on  the  condition  of  the  natives  in 
the  Congo.  His  Majesty's  Government  consider  it  unnecessary, 
therefore,  to  insist  further  on  the  existence  of  abuses  which  call 
for  administrative  reform,  while,  with  regard  to  the  measures  of 
reform  and  the  means  of  carrying  them  into  effect,  they  prefer 
to  postpone  a  detailed  expression  of  their  views  on  the  recom- 
mendations made  by  the  Commission  until  they  have  learnt  the 
conclusions  of  the  Committee  which  has  been  intrusted  with  the 
further  consideration  of  the  question,  and  of  the  reforms  to  be 

They  think  it  desirable,  however,  to  offer  at  once  some 
observations  upon  the  statement,  which  they  are  surprised  to 
find  in  the  Report,  that  the  tax  in  labour  is  both  beneficial  to 
the  natives  of  an  uncivilised  State  like  the  Congo  and  necessary 
to  the  development  of  the  country.  His  Majesty^s  Government 
have  always  admitted  the  necessity  of  a  contribution  by  the 
natives  in  some  form  to  the  requirements  of  the  State.  They 
do  not  deny  that  in  some  cases,  in  which  the  interests  of  the 
citizens  are  directly  concerned,  and  in  which  hired  labour 
cannot  be  obtained,  this  contribution  may  properly  take  the 
form  of  temporary  personal  service  ;  and,  in  admitting  the  right 
of  the  State  to  demand  such  contributions,  they  equally  admit 
by  implication  its  right  to  compel  compliance  with  the  demand. 


But  the  labour  demanded  of  the  Congolese  natives  in  the  form 
of  a  "tax"  is  not,  for  the  most  part,  employed  for  objects  of 
general  utility  in  which  they  are  themselves  interested  ;  it  is 
employed  by  the  State,  or  by  the  trading  Companies,  to  whom 
the  right  to  levy  the  "  tax  "  is  delegated,  for  the  advancement 
of  commercial  operations,  in  which  the  native  has  no  interest, 
and  from  which  he  can  receive  no  benefit. 

A  system  which  compels  the  personal  service  of  the  citizen  for 
such  a  purpose  as  this — and  it  is  to  be  observed  that  the  provisions 
in  Article  34  of  the  Law  of  the  18th  November,  1903,  enabling 
the  native  to  fulfil  his  obligations  to  the  State  by  other  means 
have  proved  in  the  Congo  to  be  almost  entirely  illusory— must 
always  in  the  opinion  of  His  Majesty's  Government,  remain 
open  to  the  imputation  of  constituting  a  form  of  servitude, 
differing  in  essence  but  little  from  actual  slavery. 

The  Commissioners  assert  that,  owing  to  the  natural  indol- 
ence of  the  natives,  hired  labour  is  not  at  present  to  be  obtained 
in  the  Congo  in  a  quantity  sufficient  for  the  development  of  the 
country.  It  is  possible  that  the  system  which  has  been  in  force 
for  the  last  fourteen  years  may  have  resulted  in  inspiring  the 
natives  of  the  Congo  with  exceptional  distrust  of  European 
employers,  but  the  knowledge  which  His  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment have  acquired  of  the  character  of  the  natives  of  tropical 
Africa  precludes  them  from  accepting  the  view  that  this  dislike 
of  work  can  only  be  overcome  by  compulsion  of  the  kind 
exercised  in  the  Independent  State. 

With  a  few  exceptions,  such  as  occur  in  other  cases  and  are 
not  peculiar  to  uncivilised  tribes,  experience  has  shown  that  the 
natives  of  the  British  Colonies  and  Protectorates  are  willing, 
whether  by  trade,  by  cultivation  of  the  land  on  their  own 
account,  or  by  accepting  employment  as  hired  labourers  for 
proper  wages,  to  provide  themselves  with  the  necessary  means 
to  pay  the  taxes  which  are  required  of  them  in  money  or 
produce  ;  and  these  taxes,  which  are  kept  within  proper  limits 
and  equitably  distributed,  are  generally  recognised  by  the 
natives  as  a  due  return  for  the  protection  which  they 

His  Majesty's  Government  are  not  aware  of  any  grounds  for 
supposing  that  the  natives  of  the  Congo,  if  provided  with  land 
for  cultivation  or  offered  employment  as  labourers,  would  show 
less  willingness  to  work  for  the  same  object,  and  the  habit  of 
work  thus  acquired  would,  no  doubt,  in  the  Congo  as  in  British 
Africa,  eventually  conquer  their  natural  indolence  and  lead 
them  to  engage  in  the  cultivation  of  the  soil  and  in  trade,  not 
merely  to  fulfil  their  obligations  to  the  State,  but  to  ameliorate 
their  own  position. 


While  protesting,  however,  against  the  theoretical  justification 
of  the  existing  system,  which  is  contained  in  the  Report, — a 
system  resulting  in  the  substitution  in  the  Congo  of  forced 
labour  for  the  hired  labour,  by  means  of  which  the  development 
of  the  other  parts  of  Africa  is  effected, — His  Majesty's  Govern- 
ment are  glad  to  note  that  the  Commissioners  consider  that,  in 
practice,  no  native  should  be  compelled  to  pay  his  contribution 
to  the  State  in  the  form  of  labour  if  he  can  find  the  means  to 
pay  it  in  money  or  produce.  His  Majesty's  Government 
earnestly  commend  this  suggestion  to  the  favourable  considera- 
tion of  the  Congo  Government,  but  they  would  point  out  that 
the  reality  of  the  reform,  doubtless  aimed  at  by  the  Com- 
mission, consists  not  so  much  in  the  proposed  amplification 
of  Article  34  of  the  existing  Law  as  in  removing  the  ob- 
stacles which  at  present  preclude  the  natives  from  taking 
advantage  of  it. 

There  is  one  other  point  to  which  His  Majesty's  Government 
desire  at  once  to  draw  the  attention  of  the  Congo  Government. 
In  dealing  with  the  question  of  the  Concessionary  Companies, 
the  Commissioners  express  the  view  that  the  ideal  remedy  for 
the  abuses  noted  within  the  Concessions  would  be  to  deprive 
these  Companies  of  all  administrative  power. 

His  Majesty's  Government  hold  that  the  exercise  of  adminis- 
trative functions  by  persons  or  Companies  who  have  acquired 
the  whole  trade  of  the  area  which  they  are  called  upon  to 
administer  must  lead  to  grave  irregularities,  and  they  would 
have  welcomed  a  declaration  by  the  Commission  condemning 
the  association  of  trade  and  administration,  whether  in  the 
person  of  the  Concessionary  Companies  or  in  that  of  the  State 
itself.  It  is  much  to  be  regretted  that  the  Commissioners 
should  have  ignored  altogether  the  evils  of  state-trading,  and 
failed  to  recommend,  in  the  case  of  the  Companies,  the  practical 
adoption  of  the  remedy  which  they  themselves  recognise  as 

His  Majesty's  Government  trust  that  the  Committee  now 
sitting  will  share  the  views  set  forth  in  this  despatch,  and  that 
the  result  of  their  deliberations  will  be  to  introduce  without 
delay  throughout  the  whole  territory  of  the  Congo  State  that 
large  measure  of  reform  which  the  Report  has  shown  to  be 
absolutely  indispensable  for  the  welfare  of  the  natives. 

I  request  you  to  read  this  despatch  to  M.  de  Cuvelier,  and  to 
leave  a  copy  of  it  with  him. 

I  am,  etc.        (Signed)        EDWARD  GREY. 



No.  3.  Sir  C.  Phipps  to  Sir  Edward  Grey. 

(Received  January  13.) 

Brussels,  January  11,  1906. 

SIR, — la  compliance  with  my  instructions  1  read  to  M.  de 
Cuvelier  your  despatch  of  the  9th  instant,  conveying  the  result 
of  the  attentive  examination  by  His  Majesty's  Government  of 
the  Report  of  the  Commission  appointed  to  inquire  into  the 
charges  made  against  the  Administration  of  the  Independent 
State  of  the  Congo  in  regard  to  the  treatment  of  natives.  I 
at  the  same  time  placed  a  copy  of  that  despatch  in  his  hands. 

After  its  perusal  M.  de  Cuvelier  made  to  me  the  following 
declaration  : — 

Without  laying  stress  on  the  conclusive  grounds  put  forward 
in  the  body  of  the  Report  (see  p.  147,  Bulletin  Officiel, 
September  and  October,  1905)  to  justify  the  non-publication  of 
the  evidence  taken  by  the  Inquiry  Commission,  he  declared  that 
the  Congo  Government,  in  view  of  the  question  of  principle  at 
issue,  considers  that  no  precept  of  international  or  public  law 
can  be  invoked  to  support  any  obligation  to  effect  such  publica- 
tion, and  further  that  the  practical  considerations  ("les  con- 
siderations de  fait")  referred  to  in  the  communication  of  His 
Majesty's  Government  in  no  respect  influence  the  sovereign 
right  of  decision  in  such  matters  which  is  claimed  by  every 
independent  State. 

I  have,  etc.        (Signed)        CONSTANTINE  PHIPPS. 

No.  4.  Sir  Edward  Grey  to  Sir  A.  Hardinge. 

Foreign  Office,  February  26,  1906. 

SIR, — I  have  to  request  that  you  will  remind  M.  de  Cuvelier 
unofficially  that  it  is  now  very  nearly  a  year  since  the  Com- 
mission of  Inquiry  returned  to  Belgium  with  evidence  of  the 
necessity  for  the  immediate  reform  of  the  Congo  Administration, 
and  express  the  hope  that  the  Commission  now  sitting  at 
Brussels  will  shortly  be  in  a  position  to  report. 

I  am,  etc.        (Signed)        EDWARD  GREY. 

No.  5.  Sir  A.  Hardinge  to  Sir  Edward  Grey, 

(Received  March  5.) 

Brussels,  February  28,  1906. 

SIR, — I  have  the  honour  to  report  that  I  spoke  this  morning 
to  M.  de  Cuvelier  in  the  sense  of  your  despatch  of  the  26th 
instant  on  the  subject  of  the  Congo  Commission  of  Inquiry. 


He  took  exception  to  the  implication  that  nearly  a  year  had 
elapsed  since  the  completion  of  the  Commission  of  Inquiry's 
work.  The  report  of  the  Commission  had  been  made  on  the 
30th  October,  1905,  and  this  really  constituted  the  termination 
of  its  labours.  On  the  very  next  day  the  Special  Commission 
for  examining  the  reforms  to  be  carried  out  as  a  consequence  of 
the  inquiry  had  been  appointed.  The  Special  Commission  had 
now  practically  finished  its  work,  and  would  meet  for  the  last 
time  to-morrow. 

In  reply  to  an  inquiry  as  to  when  we  might  expect  the 
publication  of  its  Report,  M.  de  Cuvelier  said  he  could  not  say 
yet  whether  such  a  Report  would  be  published,  or  whether  the 
recommendations  of  the  Special  Commission  would  be  embodied 
in  an  instruction  to  be  addressed  by  the  Congo  Government  to 
its  local  authorities.  On  this  point  no  decision  had  as  yet  been 
taken.  I  observed  to  M.  de  Cuvelier  that,  in  my  personal 
opinion,  it  would  be  very  desirable  that  the  results  of  the 
Special  Commission's  labours  should  be  made  public,  in  some 
form  or  other,  at  the  earliest  possible  date,  in  view  of  the  strong 
feeling  which  recent  discussions  of  the  Congo  question  had 

I  have,  etc.        (Signed)        ARTHUR  H.  HARDINGE. 

No.  6.  Sir  Edward  Grey  to  Sir  A.  Hardmge. 

Foreign  Office,  March  8,  1906. 

SIR, — I  have  received  your  despatch  of  the  28th  ultimo, 
reporting  a  conversation  with  M.  de  Cuvelier,  respecting  the 
publication  of  the  Report  of  the  Commission  appointed  to  con- 
sider the  reforms  to  be  carried  out  in  the  Congo. 

I  approve  the  language  held  by  you  on  that  occasion. 

I  am,  etc.         (Signed)        EDWARD  GREY. 

No.  7.  Sir  A.  Hardinge  to  Sir  Edward  Grey. 

(Received  March  19.) 

(Extract.)  Brussels,  March  16,  1906. 

I  asked  M.  de  Cuvelier  to-day  if  he  could  give  me  any 
information  as  to  the  results  of  the  work  of  the  Special 
Commission  on  Congo  reform,  the  termination  of  whose  sittings 
he  had  lately  announced  to  me,  as  reported  in  my  despatch 
of  the  28th  ultimo. 

He  replied  that  the  conclusions  of  the  Special  Commission 
were  in  general  harmony  with  those  of  the  Commission  of 
Inquiry,  and  that  the  Central  Administration  of  the  Inde- 


pendent  State  at  Brussels  was  now  actively  engaged  in  drafting 
a  series  of  legislative  measures  for  giving  effect  to  them.  It  had 
not  been  thought  necessary  to  publish  the  recommendations  of 
the  Special  Commission,  as  they  would  find  immediate  expression 
in  the  enactments  which  the  Government  was  preparing. 

I  inquired  how  soon  those  enactments  would  be  published. 
M.  de  Cuvelier  said  he  hoped  in  the  course  of  the  month  of 
April.  He  was  careful  to  add  that  he  gave  me  the  above 
information  "officiously,"  as  the  Congo  State  was  naturally 
jealous  of  any  show  of  interference  in  matters  of  internal 
administration.  I  might,  however,  assure  you  that  the  work 
of  reform  was  being  seriously  taken  in  hand,  and  that  they 
meant  to  make  a  good  business  ("  une  bonne  besogne  ")  of  it. 

No.  8.  Sir  Edward  Grey  to  Sir  A.  Harding e. 

Foreign  Office,  March  27,  1906. 

SIR, — His  Majesty's  Government  had  hoped  that  they  would 
before  now  have  received  from  the  Congo  Government  some 
communication  in  regard  to  the  publication  of  the  evidence 
received  by  the  Commission  of  Inquiry. 

We  understand  that  M.  de  Cuvelier  contends  that  there  is  no 
obligation  on  the  part  of  the  Congo  Government,  based  upon 
international  or  public  law,  to  effect  such  publication.  His 
Majesty's  Government  are  perfectly  aware  that  no  general 
principles  of  the  kind  indicated  can  be  invoked  in  support  of 
the  request  by  them,  nor  is  any  such  contention  put  forward  in 
paragraph  3  of  my  despatch  to  Sir  C.  Phipps,  which  merely 
explained  the  reason  of  the  inability  of  the  British  Representa- 
tive to  supply  adequate  information  as  to  the  proceedings  of  the 
Commission,  and  urged  that  the  expectations  in  which  His 
Majesty's  Government  had  indulged,  that  the  fullest  publication 
would  be  given  to  those  proceedings  would  not  be  disappointed. 

I  have  to  request  that  you  will  again  approach  M.  de  Cuvelier 
on  this  subject,  calling  his  attention  to  the  misunderstanding 
which  has  apparently  arisen  in  regard  to  the  attitude  of  His 
Majesty's  Government  and  supplementing  my  previous  despatch 
with  the  following  observations,  which,  I  feel  sure,  will  convince 
the  Congo  Government  of  the  desirability  of  reconsidering  their 
decision  in  the  matter. 

You  should,  in  the  first  place,  point  out  that  the  expectations 
to  which  I  have  referred  above  were  not  merely  derived  from  a 
forecast  of  the  action  which  the  Congo  Government  would 
probably  consider  it  advisable  to  take,  but  were  founded  on  a 
definite  expression  of  opinion  by  M.  de  Cuvelier  (as  reported  in 


Sir  C.  Phipps'  despatch  of  the  12th  August,  1904)  that  "every 
publicity  would  eventually  be  given  to  all  proceedings  which 
might  take  place."  It  cannot  be  said  that  this  undertaking, 
which  was  given  at  a  time  when  it  had  not  been  decided  that 
the  sittings  of  the  Commission  should  be  held  in  public,  was 
necessarily  cancelled  when  permission  was  given  for  a  Repre- 
sentative  of  His  Majesty's  Government  to  attend  those  sittings. 
The  permission  was  not  notified  sufficiently  early  to  enable 
Consul  Mackie  to  take  full  advantage  of  it,  and,  when  he  asked 
to  be  allowed  to  examine  the  proces-verbaux  drawn  up  before  he 
joined  the  Commission,  and  consisting  of  documents  which 
would,  he  was  assured,  had  he  arrived  earlier,  have  been  placed 
at  his  disposal  for  private  examination,  his  application  was 
refused  on  the  ground  that  such  a  privilege,  if  granted,  would 
enable  him  to  send  home  an  official  Eeport  which  would  be 
published  before  that  of  the  Commissioners. 

Apart,  however,  from  the  undertakings  which  have  been  given 
by  the  Congo  Government,  there  is  another  aspect  of  the 

The  gentlemen  of  whom  that  Commission  was  composed, 
however  great  may  have  been  their  qualifications  in  other 
respects,  had  not  had  the  advantage  of  practical  experience  in 
Colonial  administration.  While,  therefore  every  confidence 
may  be  felt  in  their  ability  and  fairness  in  describing  the  abuses 
which  came  under  their  notice,  their  views  as  to  the  essential 
causes  of  those  abuses,  and  the  recommendations  which  they 
made  for  the  reform  of  the  present  system  of  administration 
could  not  have  that  authority  which  previous  experience  of 
Colonial  administration  could  alone  confer  upon  them.  The 
value  of  a  large  part  of  the  Report  of  the  Commissioners  must 
therefore  remain  undetermined,  as  long  as  the  grounds  upon 
which  they  formed  their  conclusions  are  inaccessible  to  those 
experts  in  all  parts  of  the  world  who  are  competent  to  appre- 
ciate them. 

In  this  connection,  and  in  view  of  the  attempts  which  have 
frequently  been  made  to  compare  the  situation  in  the  Congo 
with  that  existing  in  various  British  Colonies  and  Protectorates, 
His  Majesty's  Government  desire  to  call  attention  to  the  fact 
that,  in  publishing  the  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  the 
condition  of  the  natives  of  Western  Australia,  it  was  decided 
that  the  conclusions  arrived  at  by  the  Commissioner,  although 
he  was  a  gentleman  of  considerable  Colonial  experience,  would 
not  furnish  sufficient  material  for  a  proper  appreciation  of  a 
matter  of  great  public  interest  unless  opportunity  were  given 
for  a  comparison  of  his  views  with  the  evidence  upon  which 
they  were  founded. 


In  a  conversation  with  Sir  C.  Phipps  M.  de  Cuvelier  alluded, 
although  without  laying  stress  upon  them,  to  the  "conclusive 
grounds"  put  forward  by  the  Commissioners  for  the  decision 
not  to  publish  the  evidence  received  by  them. 

The  reasons  referred  to  were — 

1.  The  desire  to  keep  the  Report  within  moderate  limits; 

2.  The  objection  to  bringing  accusations  against  persons  who 
might  not  be  able  to  defend  themselves ;  and 

3.  The  fact  that  it  was  the  object  of  the  Commissioners  not 
to  determine  the  responsibility  of  individuals,  but  to  examine 
and  ascertain  the  causes  of  abuses  of  a  general  character,  and 
to  suggest  the  necessary  reforms. 

His  Majesty's  Government  had  not  failed  to  recognise  the 
importance  of  the  two  last  considerations,  but,  with  regard  to 
the  third,  they  feel  convinced,  as  explained  above,  that  the 
publication  of  the  depositions  of  the  witnesses  is  necessary  for 
the  very  purpose  of  lending  authority  to  the  views  of  the  Com- 
mission as  to  the  causes  of  the  evils  noted,  and,  with  regard  to 
the  second,  they  consider  that  the  objection  could  easily  be 
overcome  by  omitting  from  these  depositions,  when  published, 
all  names  and  dates  which  might  lead  to  the  identification  of 
those  persons  against  whom  accusations  might  appear  to  be 

You  should  remind  M.  de  Cuvelier  that  this  was  the  course 
adopted  by  His  Majesty's  late  Government  in  connection  with 
the  Report  by  Consul  Casement.  The  objection  to  furnishing 
means  of  identification  in  that  case — namely,  the  fear  that 
natives  who  had  given  evidence  against  officials  would  suffer 
from  the  latter's  resentment — was  considerably  stronger  than  an 
objection  based,  as  in  the  present  case,  merely  on  the  danger  of 
treating  unfairly  certain  European  officials ;  but  it  was  decided 
that  such  risk  as  might  be  involved  in  the  publication  of  the 
Report  without  names  or  dates  was  justified  by  the  importance 
of  ameliorating  the  condition  of  the  Congo  natives,  and  the 
Report,  even  in  its  complete  form,  was  ultimately  furnished  to 
the  Commissioners  in  order  to  facilitate  their  inquiry,  although 
it  was  understood  that  it  might  be  included  among  the  other 
documents  used  by  them  which  would  be  published  at  the 
conclusion  of  the  inquiry. 

You  should,  in  conclusion,  once  more  press  the  Congo  Govern- 
ment to  consent  to  the  publication,  both  of  .the  evidence  taken 
by  the  Commission  of  Inquiry  and  of  the  full  proceedings  of  the 
Reform  Committee. 

I  am,  etc.  (Signed)        EDWARD  GREY. 


No.  9.  Sir  A.  Hardinge  to  Sir  Edward  Grey. 

(Received  April  2.) 

(Extract.)  Brussels,  March  29,  1906. 

I  called  on  M.  de  Cuvelier  this  afternoon  and  explained  to 
him  the  considerations  set  forth  in  your  despatch  of  the  27th 
instant,  respecting  the  publication  of  the  evidence  taken  before 
the  Congo  Commission  of  Inquiry.  I  found  him,  however, 
extremely  unwilling  to  reconsider  the  decision  of  the  Congo 
Government  not  to  publish.  It  would,  he  said,  be  impossible, 
even  if  no  names  or  dates  were  given,  to  prevent  the  identifica- 
tion of  the  individuals  accused  without  having  themselves  been 
heard  in  their  defence,  and  he  could  not  see  what  advantage  to 
anyone  concerned  would  outweigh  the  Congo  Government's  very 
natural  dislike  of  this  result.  The  number  of  persons  involved 
was  so  small  that  the  use  of  initials  instead  of  names  would  not 
protect  them.  I  was  wrong  in  supposing  that  all  the  members 
of  the  Commission  were  devoid  of  colonial  experience,  M.  Nisco's 
having  been  considerable.  Whatever  course  might  have  been 
taken  in  Western  Australia,  or  with  regard  to  Consul  Casement's 
Report,  the  publication  of  all  the  materials  on  which  a  Commis- 
sion of  Inquiry  decided  was  by  no  means  a  general  rule.  He 
instanced  the  Chalmers  Report  on  recent  disturbances  in  the 
Colony  of  Sierra  Leone,  and  that  of  the  Commission  of  Inquiry 
sent  to  the  French  Congo,  both  of  which  had  only  published 
their  conclusions  as  distinct  from  their  materials. 

I  asked  if  I  was  to  understand  that  he  definitely  refused, 
notwithstanding  the  reasons  I  had  adduced,  to  meet  the  wish  I 
had  been  instructed  by  you  to  express.  He  replied  that  he  did 
not  go  as  far  as  that ;  he  was  ready  to  lay  my  arguments  before 
the  King,  but,  speaking  personally,  his  first  impression  was  that 
there  was  much  to  be  said  against,  and  little  to  be  said  in  favour 
of,  my  proposal.  I  said  that  I  would  embody  the  considerations 
which  I  had  endeavoured  to  impress  on  him  in  a  written  Memoran- 
dum for  submission  to  His  Majesty,  and  that,  as  he  seemed  so 
sensitive  about  foreign  interference  with  the  rights  of  the  Congo 
State  in  such  a  matter  as  judicial  procedure  (he  had  laid  stress 
again  on  the  questions  of  principle,  of  the  law  of  nations,  and  of 
the  independence  of  the  State),  I  would  make  my  Memorandum 
semi-official  ("  officieux  ").  It  would,  I  thought,  be  very  desirable 
at  a  moment  like  the  present,  when  the  initiation  of  serious 
reforms  was,  as  I  trusted,  about  to  inaugurate  a  new  and  happier 
phase  of  the  Congo  question,  that  the  Congo  Government  should 
afford  to  that  of  His  Majesty  the  earnest  of  its  good-will  for 
which  you  had  asked.  It  could,  I  observed,  easily  meet  your 
wishes  without  any  sacrifice  of  its  dignity,  as  you  had  in  your 


despatch  disclaimed  the  intention  of  asserting  any  right  based 
on  international  law  to  insist  upon  compliance  with  your 

M.  de  Cuvelier  answered  that  the  Congo  Free  State  had  always 
met  British  proposals  in  a  most  conciliatory  spirit.  The  appoint- 
ment of  the  Commission  of  Inquiry,  and  the  publicity  given  to 
its  proceedings,  were  not  proofs  to  the  contrary.  His  Majesty's 
Government  had  not  made  similar  demands  with  regard  to  the 
analogous  abuses  and  inquiries  in  the  French  Congo  or  in  other 
foreign  colonies.  Why  should  the  Independent  Congo  State  be 
made  the  subject  of  differential  treatment  ? 

I  observed  that  the  whole  system  pursued  in  the  Independent 
State  had  occasioned  longer  and  louder  complaints,  and  had 
attracted  far  wider  attention,  than  any  local  abuses  in  French 
or  German  African  Colonies.  There  was,  moreover,  this  impor- 
tant difference  between  them,  that  the  French  and  German 
Colonies,  like  our  own,  were  ruled  by  States  possessing  Parlia- 
ments, through  which  public  opinion,  if  aroused  by  abuses, 
could  bring  its  influence  to  bear  on  their  Administrations, 
whereas  the  Congo  Government  was  absolute  and  irresponsible, 
so  much  so  that  the  Belgian  Chamber  had  only  the  other  day 
declared  itself  legally  incompetent  to  call  upon  it  for  papers  or 
accounts.  Nor  could  I  admit  that  the  appointment  of  the  Com- 
mission of  Inquiry  was  in  any  way  a  concession  to  His  Majesty's 
Government.  I  felt  bound  to  assume  that  the  Sovereign  of  the 
Congo  State,  as  soon  as  his  attention  had  been  called  to  the 
existence  of  grave  abuses  in  his  African  dominions,  had  spon- 
taneously resolved  to  put  an  end  to  them  without  reference  to 
the  views  of  foreign  Governments,  and  I  was  convinced  that  the 
greater  and  more  thorough  the  publicity  given  by  His  Majesty 
to  every  branch  of  the  inquiry  which  he  had  instituted,  the 
more  complete  would  be  the  confidence  reposed  in  the  sincerity 
and  integrity  of  his  purpose. 

M.  de  Cuvelier  maintained  that  the  publication  of  the  deposi- 
tions, so  far  from  helping  the  cause  of  reform,  would  only  add 
new  fuel  to  old  controversies  by  enabling  the  hostile  critics  of 
the  State  to  twist  them  into  fresh  charges  against  its  administra- 
tion. He  seemed  to  think  that  the  renewed  demand  for  publica- 
tion had  been  suggested  to  you,  with  some  such  sinister  design, 
by  the  Congo  Reform  Association.  I  assured  him  that  this  was 
not  the  case,  and  that  you  had  directed  me  to  return  to  the 
subject,  partly  in  order  to  remove  a  misconception  which  appeared 
to  exist  in  the  mind  of  the  Congo  Government,  partly  to  meet 
the  objections  which  he  had  offered  to  the  proposal  when  first 
made  by  my  predecessor,  but  chiefly  because  you  were  convinced 
that  the  full  publication  of  the  materials  on  which  the  Comniis- 


sion  had  formed  its  conclusions  was  essential,  if  its  Report  was 
to  carry  the  necessary  weight. 

I  should  add  that  M.  de  Cuvelier  repudiated  having  given  any 
engagement,  even  implied,  to  Sir  C.  Phipps  to  publish  the 
depositions.  He  had,  he  said,  promised  publicity  in  regard  to 
the  "  proceedings"  of  the  Commission,  but  "  proceedings  "  were 
not  the  same  as  " proces-verbaux"  The  sittings  of  the  Com- 
mission had  been  open,  and  its  Report  had  been  published 
without  any  modifications.  The  Congo  Government  had  not 
pledged  itself  to  more  than  this. 

No.  10.  Sir  Edward  Grey  to  Sir  A.  Harding e. 

(Extract.)  Foreign  Office,  April  7,  1906. 

I  have  received  your  despatch  of  the  29th  ultimo,  reporting  a 
conversation  with  M.  de  Cuvelier  in  regard  to  the  publication  of 
the  evidence  taken  by  the  Congo  Commission  of  Inquiry. 

With  regard  to  the  arguments  used  by  M.  de  Cuvelier  in  his 
conversation  with  you,  I  approve  your  language  on  that  occasion, 
but  I  think  it  well  to  make  certain  observations  which,  although 
intended  principally  for  your  own  information,  may  be  of  service 
to  you  in  future  interviews  : — 

1.  As  regards  the  colonial  experience  of  the  Commissioners,  I 
was  perfectly  aware  that  Baron  Nisco  had  exercised  judicial 
functions  in  the  Congo  for  many  years,  and  I  think  it  likely  that 
this  fact  alone  rendered  him,  in  the  eyes  of  M.  de  Cuvelier,  com- 
petent to  deal  with  questions  of  practical  administration.    I  need 
not  point  out  the  difference  in  the  experience  gained  by  a  Judge 
on  the  one  hand  and  an  administrative  official  on  the  other. 

2.  It  has,  I  understand,  not  yet  been  decided  whether  the 
materials  used  in  drawing  up  the  Report  of  the  Commission  of 
Inquiry  in   the   French  Congo  shall  be  published  in   full,  or 
whether  an  analysis  shall  be  submitted  to  the  Chamber  for  its 

3.  With  reference  to  the  last  paragraph  of  your  despatch,  I 
can   only   repeat   what   was   stated  in  my  previous   despatch, 
namely,  that  the  engagement  entered  into  by  the  Congo  Govern- 
ment that  the  fullest  publicity  should  be  given  to  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  Commission  cannot  be  considered  to  have  been  carried 
out  by  the  decision  of  the  Commission  to  hold  public  sittings, 
when  that  decision  was  announced  too  late  for  His  Majesty's 
Representative  to  take  advantage  of  it. 

I  shall  be  glad  to  know  when  the  Report  of  the  Commission 
of  Reforms  or  the  instructions  founded  upon  it  are  to  be  pub- 
lished. It  was  said  that  the  latter  might  be  expected  this 


month,   and    if  they   do    not   appear   soon   you   should  make 
further  inquiry. 

No.  11.  Si?'  A.  Harding e  to  Sir  Edward  Grey. 

(Received  April  9.) 

(Extract.)  Brussels,  April  6,  1906. 

I  sent  in  a  short  time  ago  the  Memorandum  to  M.  de  Cuvelier 
which  I  reported  to  you,  in  my  despatch  of  the  29th  ultimo,  that 
I  was  preparing.  I  now  have  the  honour  to  inclose  a  copy  of  it. 
I  have  made  it,  you  will  notice,  unofficial,  as  this  enabled  me  to 
write  more  freely,  and  to  touch  on  arguments  used  by  M.  de 
Cuvelier  in  his  personal  rather  than  his  official  capacity,  without 
raising  the  question  of  the  right  of  a  foreign  diplomatist  to 
discuss  the  procedure  in  domestic  matters  of  an  independent 
State — a  right  which  he  would  certainly  have  challenged  had  my 
letter  to  him  not  been  "  officious." 

Enclosure  in  No.  11. 
Sir  A.  Hardinge  to  M.  de  Cuvelier. 
(Semi-official.)  (Translation.) 

British  Legation,  April  2,  1906. 

M.  LE  CHEVALIER, — It  was  agreed  in  the  course  of  the  con- 
versation which  I  had  the  honour  to  have  with  you  last  Friday 
that  I  should  submit  to  you  in  writing  the  reasons  which  lead 
my  Government  to  desire  the  publication  of  the  evidence 
collected  by  the  Commission  of  Inquiry,  notwithstanding  the 
reasons  already  adduced  by  you  verbally  in  support  of  a  contrary 

Let  me  at  once  reply  to  the  objection  of  principle  which  you 
raised  in  discussing  this  question  with  my  predecessor,  namely, 
that  the  Congo  Government  did  not  admit  any  obligation,  based 
on  public  law,  to  make  public  the  depositions  in  question. 
My  Government  are  perfectly  aware  that  no  general  principle 
of  this  kind  can  be  invoked  in  support  of  their  request.  They, 
therefore,  confined  themselves  in  paragraph  3  of  their  dispatch 
of  the  9th  January,  to  which  Sir  Constantino  Phipps  drew 
your  attention,  to  explaining  why  their  Representative  on 
the  Commission  had  been  unable  to  furnish  sufficient  informa- 
tion relative  to  its  work,  and  to  recall  the  reasons  which  had  led 
them  to  hope  that  the  most  complete  publicity  would  be 
given  to  it.  This  expectation,  M.  le  Chevalier,  was,  moreover, 
based  on  declarations  made  by  yourself.  You  assured  my 
predecessor  (according  to  a  Report  which  he  sent  to  his  Govern- 


ment  on  the  12th  August,  1904),  "that  every  publicity  would 
eventually  be  given  to  all  the  proceedings  of  the  Commission." 
This  statement  was  anterior  to  the  decision  that  the  meetings  of 
the  Commission  would  be  public.  The  permission  given  later 
on  to  a  British  Representative  to  assist  at  these  meetings  could 
not,  therefore,  be  held  to  invalidate  this  assurance. 

The  permission  was  not,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  notified  suffi- 
ciently early  to  Mr.  Consul  Mackie  to  enable  him  to  take  full 
advantage  of  it,  and  when  he  asked  to  be  allowed  to  examine 
the  proces-verbaux  drawn  up  before  his  arrival,  leave  to  do  so 
was  refused.  These  documents,  he  was  informed,  would  have 
been  placed  at  his  disposal  had  he  arrived  earlier,  but  that  their 
examination  in  existing  circumstances  would  enable  him  to  send 
home  and  have  published  in  London  an  official  Report,  which 
might  anticipate  that  of  the  Commission. 

The  publication  of  these  documents  is,  nevertheless,  in  our 
opinion,  rendered  desirable,  and  even  urgent,  for  other  reasons 
than  those  which  I  have  just  stated. 

The  members  of  the  Commission  of  Inquiry,  however  great 
may  have  been  their  qualifications  in  other  respects,  were  not 
really  experts  in  Colonial  matters.  Whilst  acknowledging  in 
the  fullest  manner  the  skill  and  impartiality  which  they 
employed  in  describing  the  abuses  which  came  under  their 
notice,  the  definitive  authority  of  their  opinions  with  regard  to 
the  essential  causes  of  these  abuses  may  be  called  in  question  in 
the  absence  of  more  definite  information.  The  value  of  a  great 
part  of  their  Report,  as  well  as  of  the  remedies  which  they 
advocate,  remains  inevitably  undetermined  so  long  as  the 
grounds  upon  which  they  formed  their  conclusions  are  inacces- 
sible to  those  experts  in  all  parts  of  the  world  who  are 
competent  to  appreciate  them. 

In  this  connection,  and  especially  in  view  of  the  attempts 
which  have  frequently  been  made  to  compare  the  situation  in 
the  Congo  with  that  existing  in  various  British  Colonies,  my 
Government  recall  the  procedure  followed  by  the  Commission 
appointed  to  study  the  condition  of  the  natives  of  Western 
Australia.  The  official  in  charge  of  the  Commission  was 
experienced  in  matters  of  colonial  administration.  It  was 
nevertheless  decided  that  the  conclusions  which  lie  had  arrived 
at,  ought,  in  view  of  the  interest  aroused  by  his  inquiry,  to  be 
compared  with  the  documents  on  which  they  were  founded, 
and  that  these  documents  ought  also  to  be  published. 

Sir  C.  Phipps  understood  that  the  motives  which  had  decided 
the  Commission  of  Inquiry  not  to  publish  its  prods-verbaux 
were,  firstly,  the  desire  to  keep  the  Report  within  moderate 
limits ;  secondly,  a  disinclination  to  seern  to  accuse  persons  in 


their  absence,  or  perhaps  without  direct  means  of  defending 
themselves  ;  and  lastly,  the  fact  that  it  was  the  object  of  this 
Commission,  not  to  determine  the  responsibility  of  individual 
persons,  but  to  ascertain  the  primary  causes  of  certain  abuses  of 
a  general  character. 

Sir  Edward  Grey  has  not  failed  to  appreciate  the  reasonable- 
ness of  the  last  two  considerations  ;  but  he  is  of  opinion  with 
regard  to  the  third  that  the  publication  of  the  evidence  is  of 
preponderating  importance  in  order  to  give  the  Report  of  the 
Commission  the  authority  which,  without  these  documents,  it 
would  lack.  As  regards  the  second  consideration,  it  would  be 
easy,  in  his  opinion,  to  omit  from  the  proces-verbaux  published 
all  names  and  dates  which  might  lead  to  the  identification  of  the 
persons  indicated.  This  was  the  course  adopted  by  His 
Majesty's  late  Government  when  they  communicated  to  the 
Commission  of  Inquiry  for  publication,  if  it  considered  advis- 
able, the  detailed  Report  of  Mr.  Consul  Casement. 

I  trust,  M.  le  Chevalier,  that  in  view  of  the  earnest  request 
which  rny  Government  have  instructed  me  to  renew  to  you,  the 
Government  of  the  Independent  State  will  see  their  way  to 
reconsider  their  first  decision  not  to  make  public  the  proces- 
verbaux  of  the  Commission.  You  expressed  the  fear  that  Mr. 
Morel  had  perhaps  suggested  this  course,  in  the  hope  that  he 
might  discover  in  the  proces-verbaux  fresh  elements  of  propa- 
ganda against  the  officials  of  the  Independent  State,  and  that 
their  publication  would  only  help  to  fan  the  flame  and 
envenom  the  controversy  between  the  enemies  and  the  defenders 
of  the  Congo  regime.  Apprehensions  of  this  kind  can  only 
arise  from  a  misunderstanding  of  the  point  of  view  taken  by 
the  King's  Government.  They  have  already  avoided  fresh 
discussions  of  this  nature  by  replying,  as  you  are  aware,  on 
several  occasions,  to  Parliamentary  questions,  that  the  result 
of  the  proposals  of  the  two  Commissions  nominated  by  the 
Congo  Government  must  be  awaited,  and  the  Belgian  news- 
papers most  hostile  to  any  criticism  of  the  Independent  State 
have  acknowledged  the  correctness  of  this  attitude.  Far  from 
supplying  your  adversaries  with  weapons,  the  publication  of  the 
proces-verbaux  would  be,  it  appears  to  me,  a  fresh  guarantee,  in 
conjunction  with  that  of  the  Report,  of  the  sincerity  of  the 
Congo  Government.  Public  opinion  would  see  in  it  a  fresh 
proof  of  the  firmly  resolved  determination  of  that  Government 
to  persist,  without  allowing  the  question  of  personal  interests 
to  turn  it  from  that  course,  in  the  exposure  and  the  suppression 
of  all  abuses  incompatible  with  the  mission  of  civilisation  traced 
for  it  by  the  august  founder  of  the  State.  With  regard  to  your 
argument  that  in  other  countries — in  the  French  Congo,  for 


instance — similar  Commissions  have  often  only  published 
incomplete  reports,  I  would  point  out  that  it  has  almost  always 
been  a  question  in  those  Colonies  of  remedying  local  griev- 
ances, or  grievances  of  a  secondary  order,  whilst  it  is  the 
general  application  of  the  economic  regime  introduced  gradually 
into  the  Independent  State  which  has  provoked  criticism  of  a 
far  more  serious  character,  and  which  seems,  once  formulated, 
to  have  induced  the  Government  to  undertake  a  series  of  radical 
reforms.  The  more  malevolent  and  unjust,  therefore,  the 
insinuations  of  its  adversaries  may  appear  to  it,  the  greater  is 
its  interest  to  defeat  them  by  showing  that  it  has  no  secrets, 
and  by  giving  the  fullest  publicity  both  to  the  measures  of 
reform  which  it  contemplates  and  to  the  sources  of  the  evils 
which  it  is  trying  to  extirpate. 

I  have  taken  the  liberty,  M.  le  Chevalier,  in  this  aide-memoire 
to  touch  with  the  greatest  frankness  upon  considerations  which 
would  not  perhaps  have  been  in  place  in  an  official  note  to  you. 
It  is  because  I  am  convinced  that  the  Congo  Government, 
without  in  any  way  abdicating  the  right  claimed  by  it,  can  in 
this  matter,  without  loss  of  dignity  and  even  with  advantage  to 
itself,  meet  the  wishes  of  His  Majesty's  Government,  that  I  have 
felt  able  to  add  in  a  communication  of  a  semi-official  character 
these  quite  personal  reflections,  prompted  by  your  own  observa- 
tions to  the  official  representations  which  I  was  instructed  to  make 
to  you.  I  should  be  happy  if  they  succeeded  in  modifying  the 
first  impressions  which  you  confided  to  me  ;  but  whatever  the 
result  may  be,  I  shall  not  regret  having  made  every  effort  to 
reconcile  the  views  of  our  respective  Governments. 

I  have,  etc.        (Signed)        ARTHUR  H.  HARDINGE. 

No.  12.  Sir  Edward  Grey  to  Sir  A.  Harding  e. 

Foreign  Office,  April  16,  1906. 

SIR, — In  view  of  the  state  of  public  feeling  in  this  country 
with  regard  to  affairs  in  the  Congo  State,  it  is  important  that  I 
should  know  as  soon  as  possible  what  prospect  there  is  of  the 
cessation  of  the  abuses  which  are  constantly  being  brought  to 
my  notice,  and  I  have  accordingly  to  request  that  you  will  take 
an  early  opportunity  of  renewing  your  unofficial  application  to 
M.  de  Cuvelier  for  information  on  the  subject.  If  he  still  is 
unwilling  to  comply  with  your  request,  you  should  press  him  to 
reconsider  his  reply,  stating  that  His  Majesty's  Government 
consider  it  due  to  them  as  a  matter  of  common  courtesy  that 
they  should  be  informed  of  any  decision  which  has  been  taken 
in  a  question  which  has  formed  the  subject  of  prolonged  corre- 
spondence between  the  two  Governments. 


In  replying  to  questions  and  speeches  in  the  House  of 
Commons  I  have  hitherto  not  entered  upon  discussion  of  the 
state  of  affairs  disclosed  by  the  Commission  of  Inquiry,  on  the 
ground  that  the  nature  of  the  reforms,  consequent  upon  the 
Report  of  the  Reforms  Commission,  would  soon  be  made  known. 
It  was  hoped  that  they  would  be  effective,  and  be  put  into 
operation  soon.  Should  this  not  be  the  case  it  will  be  impossible 
to  avoid  adverse  comment,  which  will  come  with  added  force 
in  view  of  the  state  of  affairs  which  has  been  disclosed  by  the 
official  inquiry  of  the  Congo  Government,  and  which  will  remain 
acknowledged  and  unremedied  till  reforms  are  announced  and 


I  am,  etc.         (Signed)        EDWARD  GREY. 

No.  13.          Sir  A.  Hardinge  to  Sir  Edward  Grey. 

(Received  April  17.) 

(Extract.)  Brussels,  April,  12,  1906. 

I  asked  M.  de  Cuvelier  to-day — 

1.  Whether  he  was  in  a  position  to  give  me  a  reply  respecting 
the  publication  of  the  evidence  taken  by  the  Commission  of 
Inquiry  ;  and 

2.  What  progress  was   being  made  with   the   measures   of 
reform  which  he  had  informed  me  were  under  consideration. 

To  my  first  question,  in  connection  with  which  I  took  the 
opportunity  of  bringing  out  some  of  the  points  mentioned  in 
your  despatch  of  the  7th  instant,  he  replied  that  he  hoped  to 
be  able  to  send  me  an  answer  to  my  written  remarks  in  the 
course  of  the  next  few  days. 

With  respect  to  my  second  inquiry,  he  assured  me  that  the 
measures  of  which  he  had  already  spoken  to  me  were  being 
most  seriously  examined,  but  he  admitted  that  they  had  been 
referred  back  to  the  Local  Government  at  Boma. 

No.  14.          Sir  A.  Hardinge  to  Sir  Edward  Grey. 
(Received  April  23.) 

Brussels,  April  19,  1906. 

SIR, — I  have  the  honour  to  transmit  herewith,  in  continuation 
of  my  despatch  of  the  12th  instant,  a  copy  of  the  reply  of  M.  de 
Cuvelier  to  my  representations  respecting  the  publication  of  the 
evidence  taken  before  the  Congo  Commission  of  Inquiry. 

As  I  anticipated,  the  Congo  Government  persists  in  its 
objections  to  the  course  proposed  by  you,  on  the  ground, 


mainly,  that  the  publication  of  the  evidence  was  deemed  inex- 
pedient by  the  Commission,  whose  opinion  it  is  bound  to  respect 
(inasmuch  as  it  gave  the  Commissioners  a  free  hand),  and  whose 
reasons  for  that  opinion  it  deems  convincing. 

With  reference  to  the  fourth  paragraph  of  M.  de  Cuvelier's 
letter,  I  should  mention  that  he  asked  me  in  the  course  of  our 
discussions  whether  "proceedings"  was  the  exact  English 
equivalent  of  "proces-verbaux,"  saying  that,  if  this  was  so, 
he  had  been  misunderstood  by  Sir  C.  Phipps.  I  observed  that 
the  word  "  proceedings "  was  not  quite  a  literal  translation  of 
the  French  term  "  proces-verbaux,"  which  would  in  English  be 
more  correctly  rendered  "  minutes,"  or  "  records  of  evidence  "  ; 
but  that,  although  it  was  a  somewhat  wider  and  more  elastic 
phrase,  it  appeared  to  me  to  cover  the  depositions  recorded  by 
the  Commissioners,  as  well  as  their  other  "  actes  et  gestes." 

I  have,  etc.  (Signed)        ARTHUR  H.  HARDINGE. 

Enlosure  in  No.  14. 
M.  de  Cuvelier  to  Sir  A.  Hardinge. 
(Translation.)  (Personal  and  semi-official.) 

Brussels,  April  19,  1906. 

M.  LE  MINISTRE, — I  have  read  with  great  care  the  semi- 
official letter  which  you  have  addressed  to  me  on  the  subject  of 
the  publication  of  the  inquiry. 

You  repeat  in  it  the  declaration  which  you  were  good  enough 
to  make  to  me,  and  of  which  I  had  taken  note,  that  His 
Majesty's  Government  did  not  invoke  any  principle  of  law  in 
support  of  their  request  that  the  evidence  laid  before  the  Com- 
mission of  Inquiry  should  be  made  public.  As  you  are  aware, 
I  have,  in  my  conversations  with  your  predecessor  and  yourself, 
constantly  affirmed  that  the  internal  affairs  of  the  Congo  State, 
as  of  every  other  independent  State,  concerned  itself  alone,  and 
that  we  could  not  depart  from  this  principle  of  autonomy  which 
British  Colonies  themselves  have  lately  been  seen  to  claim  in 
their  relation  to  the  mother  country. 

The  semi-official  character  which  you  give  to  your  written 
communication,  enables  me,  however,  to  entertain  it  without 
seeming  to  call  this  principle  in  question. 

In  the  first  instance,  it  is  desirable  to  remove  the  impression 
made  by  the  conversation  which  I  had  in  August,  1904,  with 
Sir  Constantine  Phipps,  that  some  sort  of  assurance  had  been 
given  by  me,  at  some  time,  that  the  proces-verbaux  of  the  inquiry 
should  be  published.  You  were  good  enough  to  agree  with  me 
that  the  term  "proceedings,"  which  was  employed  by  Sir 


Constantino  Pliipps,  did  not  bear  that  interpretation.  Your 
Excellency  will  realise  this  even  more  clearly  by  referring  to 
the  despatch  of  Lord  Lansdowne  of  the  10th  August,  1904, 
which  led  to  my  conversation  with  Sir  Constantino  Phipps. 
This  despatch  shows  what  the  British  Government  understood 
by  the  "proceedings"  of  the  Commission.  At  that  time,  the 
question  of  the  publication  of  the  inquiry,  or  of  the  Report 
itself,  had  not  been  considered.  The  "proceedings"  of  the 
Commission,  that  is  to  say,  the  mariner  of  proceeding  which  it 
would  follow,  alone  was  under  consideration.  "It  is  possible 
that  further  regulations  are  contemplated  with  regard  to  the 
conduct  of  the  proceedings,"  were  the  words  of  the  despatch, 
and,  as  I  observed  to  Sir  C.  Phipps,  this  "  conduct  of  proceed- 
ings" has  been  given  full  publicity,  for  the  instructions  which, 
on  the  5th  September  after  that  date,  the  Government  addressed 
to  the  members  of  the  Commission  of  Inquiry,  have  been 
published,  and  the  Report  of  the  Commission  has  dealt  fully 
with  the  manner  in  which  it  concluded  the  inquiry. 

It  does  not  appear  possible  to  the  Government  to  disregard 
the  conclusions  of  the  Commission  of  Inquiry,  whose  work  is 
finished,  and  which  cannot  be  re-opened.  We  left  the  Com- 
mission liberty  to  perform  its  task  as  it  wished,  liberty  to  decide 
whether  its  sittings  would  be  public,  liberty  to  draw  up  its 
Report  as  it  thought  proper.  Besides,  we  cannot  but  concur  in 
the  "  considerations  of  the  highest  importance  "  which  it  believes 
stand  in  the  way  of  the  publication  of  the  depositions.  It  affirms 
particularly  that  publicity  of  this  kind  would  be  calculated  to 
do  irreparable  harm  to  persons  to  all  intents  and  purposes 
accused,  but  who  would  yet  be  unable  to  defend  themselves  or 
explain  their  conduct.  The  proposal  to  omit  from  the  proces- 
verbaux  the  names  and  dates  would  not  eliminate  the  danger 
foreseen  by  the  Commission  ;  the  itinerary  followed  by  the 
Commission,  and  the  places  where  it  undertook  its  examinations, 
are  well  known,  and  owing  to  the  relatively  small  number  of 
agents  employed  and  of  the  actual  circumstances  revealed  in 
each  case,  it  would  always  be  easy  for  any  one  on  the  spot  to 
identify  the  persons  attacked.  The  case  of  the  report  of  Mr. 
Casement,  published  in  similar  conditions,  is  the  best  proof  of 
this  contention  ;  for  although  I  thought,  at  the  time  of  the 
publication  of  his  report,  that  the  omission  of  date,  place,  and 
names  would  make  the  identification  of  people  difficult,  I 
observed  subsequently  that  this  precaution  was  insufficient, 
and  that  in  the  Congo  it  was  quite  easy  to  fill  in  the  names 
where  the  report  had  inserted  letters  only. 

If  the  publication  of  the  depositions  presents  obvious  draw- 
backs no  good  purpose  would  seem  to  be  served  by  publishing. 


Indeed,  the  statements  of  facts  dealt  with  by  the  Commission 
of  Inquiry  have  found  their  collective  expression  in  the  Report. 
Given  the  composition  of  the  Commission,  their  impartiality,  to 
which  justice  has  been  done  even  by  our  most  bitter  opponents, 
cannot  be  questioned.  The  publication  of  the  evidence  would 
therefore  have  no  other  results  than  to  specialise  the  facts,  with- 
out giving  additional  weight  to  the  collective  statements  of  the 

Your  Excellency's  letter  refers  to  a  consideration,  which  you 
had  already  called  attention  to,  that  is  to  say,  that  "  the 
members  of  the  Commission  of  Inquiry  not  being  really  experts 
in  colonial  affairs,  the  value  of  a  great  part  of  their  Report,  as 
well  as  of  the  remedies  they  advocate,  remains  inevitably  unde- 
termined so  long  as  the  grounds  upon  which  they  formed  their 
conclusions  are  inaccessible  to  those  experts  in  all  parts  of  the 
world  who  are  competent  to  appreciate  them."  I  trust  that  I 
have  explained  to  your  Excellency  that  if  this  quality  of 
"colonial  experts"  were  denied  to  the  Commissioners,  there 
was,  perhaps,  ground,  from  .the  point  of  view  of  colonial 
science,  for  criticising  their  suggestions  and  proposals,  but  not 
that  portion  of  their  labours  which  involved  a  statement  of 
actual  facts,  which  is  simply  a  matter  of  good  faith,  with  which 
colonial  science  has  nothing  to  do. 

I  am  not  ignorant,  M.  le  Ministre,  and  you  have  reminded 
me  of  the  fact,  that  in  the  inquiries  made  at  Sierra  Leone  and 
in  Western  Australia,  the  proces-verbaux  have  been  published. 
I,  in  my  turn,  observed  to  you  that  in  other  circumstances  the 
proces-verbaux  have  not  been  published.  Besides,  the  only  con- 
clusion to  be  drawn  from  the  precedents  in  question  is  that  in 
such  cases  every  Government  takes,  of  its  own  accord,  whatever 
decision  it  thinks  fit.  The  Congo  Government  avails  itself  of 
this  latitude.  The  Congo  Government  is  actively  and  practically 
occupied  with  the  measures  suggested  by  the  Report  of  the 
Commission  of  Inquiry. 

Allow  me  to  remind  you  that  the  step  taken  by  Sir  Constantino 
Phipps  on  the  llth  January  last  followed  close  upon  the  letter 
Mr.  Morel  addressed  to  the  Foreign  Office  "  to  suggest  that 
pressure  should  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  Congo  Government 
to  give  full  publicity  to  the  evidence  laid  before  its  own  Com- 
mission," and  I  cannot  but  believe  that  this  suggestion,  coming 
from  Mr.  Morel,  whose  role  is  known  to  you,  was  aimed  at  the 
Congo  State.  Although  we  do  not  fear  these  attacks,  I  shall 
continue  to  believe  that  our  opponents  would  deliberately  seek 
in  such  isolated  depositions  the  means  of  misleading  public 
opinion  on  the  subject  of  Congo  affairs. 

I  am,  etc.  (Signed)        CUVELIER. 

P.W.  M 


No.  15.  Sir  Edward  Grey  to  Sir  A.  Harding e. 

Foreign  Office,  May  3,  1906. 

SIR, — I  have  received  your  despatch  of  the  19th  ultimo 
respecting  the  reform  of  the  Congo  administration. 

For  the  present,  at  any  rate,  it  appears  useless  further  to  press 
for  the  publication  of  the  evidence  received  by  the  Commission 
of  Inquiry,  but  you  should  continue  to  urge  the  importance  of 
making  known  at  the  earliest  possible  date  the  results  of  the 
labours  of  the  Commission  of  Reforms. 

I  notice  that,  in  the  second  paragraph  of  the  note  inclosed  in 
your  despatch,  M.  de  Cuvelier  appears  to  imply  that  His 
Majesty's  Government  have  now  adopted  the  view  that  any 
interference  in  the  internal  affairs  of  the  Congo  State  on  the 
part  of  foreign  Powers  is  entirely  unjustifiable.  You  should, 
when  a  suitable  opportunity  presents  itself,  explain  to  M.  de 
Cuvelier  that  His  Majesty's  Government  have  in  no  way 
modified  the  view  held  by  them  and  their  predecessors  that  the 
Powers  parties  to  the  Berlin  Act.have  every  right  to  take  such 
steps  as  they  may  consider  called  for  with  a  view  to  the  due 
observance  by  the  Indepeadent  State  of  its  obligations  under 
that  Act. 

I  am,  etc.  (Signed)        EDWARD  GREY. 

No.  16.          Sir  A.  Hardinge  to  Sir  Edward  Grey. 

(Received  May  14.) 
(Extract.)  Brussels,  May  11,  1906. 

I  spoke  to  M.  de  Cuvelier  yesterday  in  the  sense  of  your 
despatch  of  the  3rd  instant. 

M.  de  Cuvelier  argued  that  no  foreign  Power  had  any  right  to 
interfere  with  the  internal  administration  of  the  Congo  Free 
State.  He  denied  even  that  a  right  of  this  nature  was  vested  in 
the  signatories  of  the  Berlin  Act  collectively.  The  British 
Government  could,  of  course,  interfere  on  behalf  of  its  own 
subjects,  if  commercial  or  other  rights  guaranteed  to  them  by 
the  Berlin  Act,  or  other  engagements  to  which  the  Independent 
State  was  a  party,  were  violated  by  the  Congo  Government,  as 
it  could,  if  tlie  Treaty  rights  of  Englishmen  were  violated  in 
Belgium  by  the  Belgian  Government.  It  could  not,  however, 
consistently  with  international  law,  intervene  between  the  Congo 
State  and  the  tatter's  own  subjects. 

I  asked  M.  de  Cuvelier  whether  he  meant  me  to  understand 
that,  in  his  opinion,  the  6th  Article  of  the  Berlin  Act,  by  which 
the  Congo  Government  was  bound  to  watch  over  the  welfare  of 


the  natives  and  improve  their  material  and  moral  condition,  was 
meaningless,  and  that  the  other  Signatories  of  the  Act  had  no 
right  to  make  representations  if  the  Independent  State  ignored 
or  repudiated  it.  If,  for  instance,  to  take  an  extreme  case,  the 
Congo  Government  were  to  re  establish  slavery  or  the  Slave 
Trade,  the  suppression  of  which  was  one  of  the  main  ends  of  the 
Berlin  Act,  did  he  hold  that  the  other  parties  to  that  Act  would 
be  precluded,  either  separately  or  collectively,  from  objecting,  on 
the  ground  that  by  so  doing  they  would  be  interfering  between 
an  independent  Sovereign  and  his  subjects  ? 

M.  de  Cuvelier  parried  the  question  by  asking  whether  I  held 
that  the  Congo  Free  State  would  be  justified  in  calling  upon  His 
Majesty's  Government  to  abolish  slavery  in  the  East  Africa 
Protectorate?  That  Protectorate,  like  the  Congo  State  itself, 
was  within  the  conventional  basin  governed  by  the  Berlin  Act. 

I  pointed  out  to  him  that  the  provisional  toleration  of  the 
legal  status  of  slavery  in  the  mainland  territory  of  the  Sultan 
of  Zanzibar  was  covered  by  the  Articles  in  the  Brussels  Act 
dealing  with  "countries  whose  institutions  admit  of  the  existence 
of  domestic  slavery,"  such  as  Turkey,  Egypt,  Persia,  and 
Zanzibar,  and  that  the  question  which  he  had  put  had  there- 
fore no  bearing  whatever  upon  the  one  before  us. 

He  thereupon  said,  although  not  very  decisively,  that  even 
on  the  absurd  assumption  that  the  Free  State  were  to  establish 
slavery,  the  other  parties  to  the  Berlin  Act  could  not  legally 
interfere,  and  that  the  engagements  I  had  quoted  were  a 
declaration  of  general  principles  and  intentions  as  regarded  the 
treatment  of  the  native  populations  rather  than  a  binding  obli- 
gation which  the  remaining  Signatories,  or  any  one  of  them,  had 
a  right  to  enforce.  I  observed  that  I  could  not  agree  with  him, 
and  that  I  thought  it  right  to  make  your  view  of  the  question 
quite  clear.  He  said  he  took  note  of  what  I  had  stated,  but,  on 
his  side,  must  adhere  to  his  opinion,  adding  that  I  should  find  it 
developed  in  a  work  on  the  Congo  State  which  he  proposed  to 
send  me. 

There  is  nothing  new  in  the  position  taken  up  by  M.  de 
Cuvelier,  who  repeatedly  advanced  these  contentions  in  dis- 
cussions with  my  predecessor. 

No.  17.          Sir  Edward  Grey  to  Sir  A.  Hardinge. 

Foreign  Office,  May  19,  1906. 

SIR, — I  have  received  your  despatch  of  the  llth  instant, 
reporting  your  conversation  with  M.  de  Cuvelier  respecting  the 
right  of  the  Powers  parties  to  the  Berlin  Act  to  intervene 


between  the  Independent  State  of  the  Congo  and  the  natives  of 
that  country  with  a  view  to  the  protection  of  the  latter.  I 
approve  the  language  held  by  you  on  that  occasion. 

I  am,  etc.  (Signed)        EDWARD  GREY. 

EXERCISE  No.  9. 


1.  We  held  our  first  meeting  on  the  10th  January,  1908,  at 
the  Office  of  Arms,  Dublin  Castle.     The   Right  Hon.   J.  H. 
Campbell,  K.C.,  M.P.,  and  Mr.  Timothy  M.  Healy,  K.C.,  M.P. 
(instructed  by  Messrs.  W.  R.  Meredith  and  Son,  Solicitors), 
appeared  as  Counsel   on   behalf   of    Sir   Arthur  Vicars ;    the 
Solicitor-General  for  Ireland,  Mr.  Redmond  Barry,  K.C.,  M.P. 
(instructed    by   M.    Malachi    Kelly,    Chief    Crown    Solicitor), 
appeared  on  behalf  of  the  Government. 

2.  At  the  outset  of  our  proceedings  Mr.  J.  H.  Campbell,  as 
counsel  for  Sir  Arthur  Vicars,  asked  us  whether  the  Inquiry 
was  to  be  public  or  private.     We  informed  him  that  we  were 
prepared  to  hear  any  application  he  had  to  make  on  that  point, 
and  to  consider  it  carefully.     He  then  proceeded  to  apply  that 
the  Inquiry  might  be  held  in  public.    As  most  of  his  arguments 
were  based  upon  the  terms  of  the  reference  in  Your  Excellency's 
Warrant,  and  upon  the  absence  of  any  power  in  your  Com- 
missioners to  compel  the  attendance  of  witnesses  or  to  examine 
them  upon  oath,  we  pointed  out  that  these  objections  applied  to 
any  Inquiry  at  all  under  Your  Excellency's  Warrant/whether 
public  or  private.     Mr.  Campbell  then  declared  that  under  no 
circumstances  could  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  or  his  counsel  take  any 
part  in  an  Inquiry  held  under  Your  Excellency's  Warrant,  and 
withdrew  his  application   for  a   public   Inquiry.     Sir  Arthur 
Vicars  and  his  counsel  then  withdrew,  and  we  have  had  no 
assistance  from  them  in  our  Inquiry.     We  had  the  advantage, 
however,  of  the  written  statements  made  by  Sir  Arthur  Vicars 
to  the  police  and  of  the  oral  statements  made  by  him  at  various 
times  to  the  police  and  other  witnesses  examined  before  us. 

3.  On  the  withdrawal  of  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  we  adjourned  till 
the  next  morning,  in  order  that  we  might  consider,  and  give  the 
Government  time  to  consider,  the  situation  that  had  thus  arisen. 
We  were  disposed  to  think  that  no  useful  purpose  could  be 
served  by  the  prosecution  of  the  Inquiry  after  the  withdrawal 


of  Sir  Arthur  Vicars,  who,  as  the  responsible  custodian  of  the 
Jewels,  was  the  person  mainly  interested  in  the  result  of  the 
Inquiry  ;  and  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  Government  were 

frobably  already  in  possession  of  all  the  information  which  our 
nquiry  was  likely,  under  the  circumstances,  to  elicit.  But 
when  the  Solicitor-General,  on  behalf  of  the  Government,  asked 
us  to  hear  the  evidence  relevant  to  our  Inquiry  which  he  was  in 
a  position  to  offer,  and  assured  us  he  was  in  possession  of  im- 
portant evidence  on  both  branches  of  our  Inquiry,  we  felt  that 
we  could  not  refuse  to  receive  and  record  the  evidence  thus 
tendered,  and  that  we  must  leave  the  responsibility  for  any 
deficiences  in  the  evidence  before  us  on  those  who  refused  to 
take  part  in  our  proceedings. 

4.  We  took  evidence  on  five  days,  January  llth,  13th,  14th, 
15th  and  16th,  and  during  that  time  there  were  examined  before 
us  every  person  employed  in  the  Office  of  Arms  during  the  year 
1907,  except  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  himself;  Mr.  Horlock,  his  Clerk  ; 
and  Miss  Gibbon,  the  Typist.     We  sat  in  the  Library  of  the 
Office  of  Arms  where  the  safe  containing  the  lost  jewels  stood  at 
the  time  of   the  robbery,   and  we  had  a  full  opportunity  of 
inspecting,  on  the  spot,  all  the  arrangements  of  the  Office.     We 
also  examined  every  Police  Officer  who  had  been  engaged  in  the 
investigation  of  the  circumstances  attending  the  robbery,  and 
certain  experts  in  the  construction  and  use  of  safes  and  safe- 
locks  who  gave  us  valuable  information.     We  have  thus  been 
able  to  ascertain  every  material  circumstance  connected  with 
the  loss  of  the  Crown  Jewels,  and  we  propose  to  give  Your 
Excellency,  in  the  first  place,  a  short  statement  of  the  facts 
which  appear  to  us  to  be  the  most  important  in  relation  to  the 
subject  of  our  Inquiry. 

5.  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  was  appointed  Ulster  King  of  Arms  in 
February,  1893.     At  that  time  the  Office  of  Arms  was  in  the 
Bermingham  Tower,  but  in  1903  it  was  removed  to  the  building 
now  occupied  in  the  Upper  Castle  Yard.     The  duties  of  Ulster 
King  of  Arms  in  relation  to  the  custody  of  the  Crown  Jewels 
and  of  the  other  Insignia  of  the  Order  of  St.  Patrick  are  defined 
in  the  revised  statutes  of  the  Order,  dated  29th  July,  1905.     By 
Statute  27,  Ulster  King  of  Arms  "  shall  have  the  custody  of  the 
.  .  .  jewelled  Insignia  of  the  Grand  Master."     By  Statute  12, 
"The  jewelled  Insignia  of  the  Grand  Master  .  .  .  which  are 
Crown  Jewels  .  .  .  shall  be  deposited  by  our  Ulster  King  of 
Arms  in   the   Chancery  of   the  Order,   along  with   the   other 
Insignia  of  the  Order."     By  Statute  37  of  the  Chancery  of  the 
Order  "  shall  be  in  the  Office  of  Arms  in  Our  Castle  of  Dublin." 
And  by  Statute  20  it  is  ordained  that  the  Collars  and  Badges 
of  the  Knights  Companions  of  the  Order  which  are  in  the 


custody  of  Ulster  King  of  Arms  "  shall  be  deposited  for  safe 
keeping  in  a  steel  safe  in  the  Strong  Koom  in  the  Chancery  of 
the  Order  in  the  Office  of  Arms  in  Ireland."  (The  particular 
Statutes  here  quoted  are  set  out  in  Appendix  B.) 

6.  At  the  fitting  up  of  the  new  Office  of  Arms  in  1903  a 
Strong  Room  was  built  by  the  Board  of  Works  according  to 
plans  approved  by  Sir  Arthur  Vicars.     Sir  George  Holmes,  the 
Chairman  of  the  Board  of  Works,  informed  us  that,  at  the  time 
the  plans  for  this  Strong  Room  were  prepared,  he  was  not  told 
by  Sir  Arthur  Vicars,  nor  did  he  know,  that  the  safe  in  which 
the  Crown  Jewels  and  other  Insignia  were  kept,  was  to  be 
placed  in  the  Strong  Room.     After  the  Strong  Room  was  com- 
pleted it  was  found  that  the  safe  could  not  be  got  in  by  the 
door.     When  Sir  George  Holmes'  attention  was  called  to  this 
he  offered  to  place  the  safe  in  the  Strong  Room  either  by  break- 
ing down  part  of  the  wall  and  rebuilding  it  or  by  temporarily 
removing  the  iron  bars  of  the  window.     Sir  Arthur  Vicars  did 
not  accept  this  offer  on  the  ground  that  the  safe  would  occupy 
too  much  floor  space  in  the  Strong  Room,  and  said  that  unless 
he  got  a  smaller  safe  he  would  prefer  it  to  remain  outside.     It 
was  ultimately  arranged  that  the  safe  should  remain  in  the 
Library  until  it  was  wanted  for  some  other  office,  when  Sir 
George  Holmes  promised  to  provide  a  new  safe  which  could  be 
placed  in  the  Strong  Room.     According  to  the  evidence  of  Sir 
George  Holmes  this  arrangement   was   acquiesced  in   by   Sir 
Arthur  Vicars,  and  so  matters  remained  down  to  the  date  of 
the  disappearance  of  the  Jewels.     Sir  George  Holmes  told  us 
that  his  attention  was  never  called  by  Sir  Arthur  Vicars,  or 
anybody  else,  after  July,  1905,  to  the  requirements  of  Statutes 
12  and  20,  that  the  Crown  Jewels  and  other  Insignia  of  the 
Order  of  St.  Patrick  "  shall  be  deposited  for  safe  keeping  in  a 
steel  safe  in  the  Strong  Room."     It  is  certain  that  this  require- 
ment of  the  Statutes  was  never  complied  with,  and  that  from 
the  date  of  entering  upon  the  new  office  in  1903  until  the  date 
of  the  disappearance  of  the  Jewels,  the  safe  was  kept,  not  in  the 
Strong  Room,  but  in  the  Library. 

7.  The  Office  of  Arms  is  entered  by  an  outer  door  opening 
into  the  Upper  Castle  Yard.     There  are  two  locks  on.  that  door, 
a  latch  opened  by  a  latch-key,  and  a  large  stock-lock  with  a  key 
hole  both  inside  and  outside.    The  stock  or  main  lock  was  never 
locked  by  day  or  night.     The  door  was  shut  at  night  and  on 
Sundays  and  holidays  by  slipping  the  bolt  of  the  latch,  so  that 
any  person  having  a  latch-key  could  enter  at  any  time  of  the 
day  or  night  when  the  Office  was  closed.     When  the  latch  was 
unlocked  the  door  was  opened  by  turning  a  handle.     There  was 
no  bell  on  the  door  to  indicate  when  it  was  being  opened  or 


shut.  There  were  at  least  seven  latch-keys  for  this  door  out- 
standing. Sir  Arthur  Vicars,  Mr.  Btirtchaell,  Secretary,  Mr. 
P.  G.  Mahony,  Cork  Herald,  William  Stivey,  the  messenger, 
Mrs.  Farrell  the  office  cleaner,  Detective  Kerr,  and  John 
O'Keeffe,  a  servant  of  the  Board  of  Works,  each  had  a  latch- 
key. It  was  necessary  that  Mrs.  Farrell,  Stivey,  Detective 
Kerr,  and  O'Keeffe  (who  lit  and  extinguished  the  light  in  the 
Clock  Tower  during  the  Castle  season)  should  have  access  to  the 
Office  at  times  when  it  was  closed,  and  perhaps  no  better 
arrangement  could  conveniently  have  been  made.  But  it  is 
obvious  that  the  fact  that  the  Office  was  so  easily  accessible  at 
all  hours  and  that  seven  latch-keys  were  given  out,  some  of  them 
in  the  hands  of  persons  of  humble  station,  made  it  additionally 
necessary  that  special  provision  should  be  made  for  the  safe 
keeping  of  the  Crown  Jewels.  During  the  day  this  outer  door 
could  be  opened  by  anybody  merely  by  turning  the  handle. 
There  was  no  one  on  the  ground  floor  but  the  messenger  Stivey, 
whose  usual  seat  did  not  command  a  view  of  the  door.  The 
Library,  in  which  the  safe  containing  the  Crown  Jewels  was 
kept,  is  not  an  ordinary  working-room  and  is  not  occupied, 
except  temporarily,  by  any  of  the  officials.  One  door  of  the 
Library  is  quite  close  to  the  outer  door,  and  is  so  situated  that 
any  person  might  quietly  open  the  outer  door  and  enter  the 
Library  without  attracting  attention.  A  second  door  of  the 
Library  opened  into  the  Messenger's  Eoom  and  was  usually  left 
open.  The  Library  was  the  Waiting-Boom  of  the  Office,  and 
every  person  who  called  on  a  matter  of  business  or  curiosity  was 
shown  in  there  until  some  of  the  officials  came  down  from  the 
first  floor  to  attend  to  him.  The  Office  of  Arms,  in  common 
with  all  the  other  offices  in  Dublin  Castle,  was  visited  and 
inspected  every  evening,  after  all  the  officials  had  left,  by  a 
member  of  the  detective  force,  whose  duty  it  was  to  see  that 
the  offices  were  safe,  but  who  had  no  special  duty  in  connexion 
with  the  custody  of  the  Crown  Jewels. 

8.  The  Strong  Room  is  practically  an  off-shoot  from  the 
Messenger's  Room  in  which  Stivey  sat  when  on  duty  except 
when  he  was  sent  on  a  message,  or  was  at  dinner,  or  was  called 
upstairs.  There  were  four  keys  for  the  outer  door  of  this  Strong 
Room.  One  was  in  possession  of  Sir  Arthur  Vicars,  Stivey  held 
one,  Mr.  P.  G.  Mahony  one,  and  one,  which  had  for  a  short  time 
been  in  possession  of  Mr.  Burtchaell,  was,  at  the  date  of  the  dis- 
appearance of  the  jewels,  in  the  Strong  Room  in  a  drawer  stated 
to  be  unlocked.  Close  inside  the  outer  door  of  the  Strong  Room 
is  a  strong  steel  grille  which  must  be  opened  before  access  can 
be  had  to  the  Strong  Room.  One  key  of  this  grille,  which  was 
in  Stivey's  charge,  was  constantly  in  the  lock  whether  the  Strong 


Room  was  open  or  shut,  except  when  Stivey  went  on  a  message 
or  was  at  dinner,  when  he  locked  the  grille  and  placed  the  key 
of  the  grille  in  an  unlocked  drawer  in  his  room,  leaving  the 
outer  door  o£  the  Strong  Room  open.  This  latter  arrangement 
was  made  by  Sir  Arthur  Vicars'  order.  Every  official  in  the 
office  knew  where  the  key  of  the  grille  was  kept  in  Stivey's 
absence,  and  had  access  to  it.  It  was  the  custom  for  Stivey  to 
open  the  Strong  Room  every  morning  when  he  came  on  duty, 
and  to  leave  both  the  outer  door  and  the  grille  open  until  he 
left  in  the  evening,  except  upon  occasions  of  his  temporary 
absence,  when  he  made  the  arrangements  which  we  have  already 
described.  If  he  were  merely  called  upstairs  and  there  were  no 
stranger  about,  he  left  both  the  outer  door  and  the  grille  open. 
This  Strong  Room  ought  to  have  contained  the  safe  in  which 
the  Crown  Jewels  and  other  Insignia  were  kept,  but  it  did,  as  a 
matter  of  fact,  contain  articles  of  very  great  value,  including 
three  gold  collars  and  badges  of  Knights  Companions  of  the 
Order,  two  State  Maces,  the  Sword  of  State,  a  jewelled  Sceptre, 
a  Crown,  and  two  massive  Silver  Spurs.  These  were  exposed  in 
a  glass  case.  There  was  another  gold  collar  in  a  case  somewhere 
else  in  the  Strong  Room  (see  Sir  Arthur  Vicars'  written 
statement  to  the  Police,  July  12th,  1907,  Appendix  A).  It 
is  plainly  contrary  to  the  Statute  20  of  the  Order  that  these 
Collars  and  Badges  of  the  Knights  Companions  should  be  kept 
exposed  in  a  glass  case  in  the  Strong  Room.  The  words  of  tne 
Statute  are  express — "  in  a  steel  safe  in  the  Strong  Room." 

9.  We  have  thus  given  a  general  description  of  the  way  in 
which  the  Office  of  Arms  was  kept,  and  of  the  provision  made 
for  the  safe-keeping  of  the  Crown  Jewels  and  other  Insignia  of 
the  Order  of  St.  Patrick.  We  have  stated  no  facts  but  those 
which  are  common  to  all  the  witnesses,  and  which  are  admitted 
by  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  himself  in  his  statements  to  the  police. 
Looking  at  these  facts  alone,  and  without  any  reference  to  the 
loss  of  the  Crown  Jewels  or  the  incidents  that  accompanied 
that  loss,  we  cannot  arrive  at  the  conclusion  that  Sir  Arthur 
Vicars  exercised  due  vigilance  and  proper  care  in  the 
custody  of  the  Jewels.  We  do  not  dwell  upon  the  positive 
breaches  of  his  duty  under  Statutes  12  and  20  of  the  Order. 
But,  apart  from  any  specific  duty  imposed  upon  him  by 
the  Statutes,  we  cannot  think  that  'he  showed  proper  care  in 
leaving  the  safe  containing  the  Crown  Jewels  in  a  room  which 
was  open  to  the  public  all  day,  and  was  open  all  night  to  any 
person  who  either  possessed,  or  could  get  possession  of  one  of 
seven  latchkeys.  We  should  have  thought  that  in  the  case  of 
Jewels  like  these,  of  immense  value  and  of  national  importance, 
the  responsible  custodian  would,  instead  of  carrying  about  the 


key  of  the  safe  in  his  pocket,  have  deposited  it  with  his  banker 
or  in  some  other  place  of  security  except  on  the  rare  occasions 
when  it  was  necessarily  in  use.  We  are  of  opinion  that  great 
want  of  proper  care  was  also  shown  in  respect  of  the  Strong 
Room.  The  fact  that  three,  and  at  one  time  four,  keys  of  this 
room  were  out  in  the  hands  of  different  persons,  one  of  whom 
was  Stivey,  the  messenger,  who  also  had  control  of  a  key  of  the 
grille,  is  in  itself  a  proof  of  want  of  due  care.  We  have  been 
unable  to  ascertain  any  sufficient  reason  why  a  key  of  this 
Strong  Room  should  have  been  in  any  hands  but  Sir  Arthur 
Vicars'  own.  The  further  fact  that  it  was  the  custom  that 
William  Stivey,  the  messenger,  should  open  both  doors  of  the 
Strong  Room  on  his  arrival  in  the  morning,  and  that  they 
should  be  kept  open  all  day  until  Stivey  left  in  the  evening,  also 
appears  to  us  to  show  great  want  of  care. 

10.  We  now  come  to  the  circumstances  connected  with  the 
loss  of  the  Jewels  and  with  the  discovery  of  their  loss.     It  is 
ascertained  beyond  doubt  that  the  Jewels  were  in  the  safe  on 
June  llth,  1907.     They  were  shown  on  that  date  by  Sir  Arthur 
Vicars  to  Mr.  John  Crawford  Hodgson,  Librarian  to  the  Duke 
of  Northumberland.     There  is  no  evidence  that  from  that  date 
until  the  6th  of  July,  when  their  loss  was  discovered,  they  were 
seen  by  anybody,  nor  is  there  any  evidence  that  the  safe  was 
ever  opened  by  any  one  in  the  Office  between  those  dates.     Sir 
Arthur  Vicars  himself  says  in  the  statement  already  quoted  : — 
"From  llth  June  to  6th  July  I  have  no  recollection  of  seeing 
the  Jewels  nor   of   having    gone   to   the   safe."     The   officials 
attending  in  the  Office  between  those  dates  were  Sir  Arthur 
Vicars,  Mr.  Burtchaell,  Mr.  Mahony,  Mr.  Horlock,  Miss  Gibbon, 
Stivey,   the   messenger,    and   Mrs.    Farrell,   the  office   cleaner. 
Neither  Mr.  Goldney,  Athlone  Pursuivant,  nor  Mr.  Shackleton, 
Dublin  Herald,  appears  to  have  been  in  the  Office,  or  indeed  in 
Ireland,  at  any  time  between  those  dates.     Mr.  Mahony  was  not 
in  the  Office  from  April  until  July  4th,  except  on  one  day  in 
May,  so  that,  of  the  period  between  llth  June  and  6th  July, 
he  was  only  in  the  Office  on  three  days. 

11.  On  the  morning  of  Wednesday,  3rd  July,  Mrs.  Farrell, 
the  Office  cleaner,  on  coming  to  the  Office  at  her  usual  hour 
between  7   and    8    o'clock,    found    that    the    outer  .door  was 
unlocked.     The  bolt  of  the  latch  was  caught  back,  so  that  she 
opened  the  door  by  merely  turning  the  handle.      Mrs.  Farrell 
waited  until  Stivey,  the  messenger,  came  in  about  10,  and  told 
him   what  had  happened.     When  Sir  Arthur  Vicars   arrived 
about  12,  Stivey  told  him  what  Mrs.  Farrell  had  reported,  and 
Sir  Arthur  replied  "  Is  that  so  ?"  or  "  Did  she  ?"     No  further 
notice  was  taken  of  the  incident.     It  was  not  reported  to  the 


police,  nor  was  Kerr,  the  detective,  whose  duty  it  was  to  inspect 
the  offices  at  night,  informed  of  the  circumstance.  Stivey  is 
perfectly  certain  that  he  slipped  the  bolt  of  the  latch  when 
leaving  the  office  about  5.30  on  the  Tuesday  evening,  but  he  is 
not  certain  whether  he  left  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  behind  him  or 
not.  Detective  Kerr  visited  the  Office  about  7  p.m.  on  the 
Tuesday  evening,  opened  the  door  by  his  latchkey,  found  it 
locked,  found  no  one  in  the  office,  made  his  usual  round  of 
inspection,  tried  the  door  as  he  went  out,  and  made  sure  it  was 
locked.  It  is  plain  upon  this  evidence  that  some  one  in  posses- 
sion of  a  latchkey  visited  the  Office  after  Detective  Kerr  had 
left  it,  and  took  the  trouble  to  draw  back  the  bolt  of  the  latch 
and  fasten  it.  It  seems  to  us  an  extraordinary  instance  of 
negligence  on  Sir  Arthur  Vicars'  part  that  he  made  no  inquiry 
about  this  singular  incident,  did  not  interrogate  Kerr  the 
detective,  made  no  report  to  the  police,  and  did  not  examine  the 
safe  or  Strong  Boom  to  .see  that  all  was  right.  Sir  Arthur 
Vicars'  own  account  of  this  matter  is  as  follows : — "  On 
Wednesday,  3rd  July,  to  the  best  of  my  recollection,  I 
arrived  at  the  Office  at  12  o'clock  noon,  and  left  about  6  p.m. 
Stivey  informed  me  that  he  was  told  by  Mrs.  Farrell,  the  office 
cleaner,  that  she  found  the  hall  door  open  when  she  arrived  to 
clean  the  office  in  the  morning."  (Sir  Arthur  Vicars'  Statement 
of  12th  July,  1907— Appendix  A.) 

12.  On  the  morning  of  Saturday,  6th  July,  a  still  more  startling 
incident  occurred.  Mrs.  Farrell  opened  the  office  at  her  usual 
hour  between  7  and  8  a.m.  and  walked  into  the  messenger's 
room  to  see  if  any  written  message  had  been  left  for  her.  On 
entering  the  messenger's  room  she  found  that  the  outer  door  of 
the  Strong  Room  was  standing  ajar.  There  were  two  keys 
hanging  in  the  lock  of  the  grille.  Mrs.  Farrell  took  these  two 
keys  out  of  the  grille  lock,  and  shut  the  outer  door  of  the  Strong 
Room.  She  did  not  wait  until  Stivey  came,  either  because  he 
was  late  or  because  she  was  in  a  hurry,  but  she  wrote  a  note  on 
his  blotting-pad  telling  him  what  she  had  found,  and  left  the 
keys  on  the  note.  When  Stivey  came  about  10.20a.m.  he  found 
Mrs.  FarrelFs  note  and  the  two  keys  lying  beside  it.  These  two 
keys,  as  he  explained  to  us,  were  the  key  of  the  grille  and  a 
smaller  key  which  opened  the  presses  in  the  Library,  and  they 
were  tied  together  by  a  piece  of  twine.  The  presence  of  the 
keys  was  indubitable  evidence  that  the  Strong  Room  door  had 
been  opened  or  had  been  left  open,  as  the  keys  were  left  in  the 
lock  of  the  grille  the  night  before.  Stivey  at  once  examined  the 
Strong  Room  and  found  that  nothing  had  been  touched  inside 
so  far  as  he  could  observe.  On  the  preceding  evening  Stivey 
had  gone  to  Sir  Arthur  Vicars'  room  about  5.30  p.m.,  and  found 


him  there  with  Mr.  Horlock.  He  asked  Sir  Arthur  if  he  might 
go,  and  was  told  he  might.  He  asked  Sir  Arthur  if  he  wanted 
the  Strong  Room  any  more  that  night.  Sir  Arthur  said  "No, 
you  may  close  it."  Stivey  then  closed  and  locked  the  outer  door 
of  the  Strong  Room,  leaving  the  two  keys  hanging  in  the  lock 
of  the  grille.  Stivey's  statement  is  fully  confirmed  by  Sir 
Arthur  Vicars,  who  says  : — "  On  Friday,  5th  July,  I  left  the 
office  at  7.15  p.m.  About  5.45  p.m.  Stivey  asked  me  whether  he 
could  go,  and  I  said  *  Yes.'  He  asked  me  whether  he  should 
lock  the  Strong  Room,  and  I  told  him  to  do  so,  at  the  same  time 
handing  him  a  MS.  to  be  replaced  therein.  I  subsequently  had 
occasion  to  pass  the  Strong  Room  door  to  go  to  the  telephone 
more  than  once,  and  the  door  was  closed."  (Statement  of  12th 
July,  1907 — Appendix  A.)  About  7.15  p.m.  Sir  Arthur  Vicars 
left  his  office  with  Mr.  Horlock.  Before  he  left  he  made  what 
he  called  his  "  usual  tour  of  inspection."  "  I  passed  through 
the  Library,  glancing  at  all  the  bookcases,  and  satisfied  myself 
they  were  closed.  I  passed  into  the  messenger's  room,  noticed 
the  window  was  bolted,  and  tried  the  handle  of  the  Strong 
Room  door  and  found  the  door  was  locked."  (Same  Statement, 
Appendix.)  Almost  immediately  after  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  had 
left  the  office  Detective  Kerr  entered  it,  and  examined  every 
room  in  the  house.  He  noticed  the  Strong  Room  door  ;  it  was 
closed  and  bolted.  He  left  the  office  about  7.30  p.m.  On  these 
facts  it  was  plain  that  someone  had  entered  the  office  after  the 
Detective  had  left  on  Friday  evening,  and  had  opened  the  Strong 
Room  and  left  it  open.  It  seems  very  strange  that,  after  what 
had  happened  on  the  preceding  Wednesday  morning,  Sir  Arthur 
Vicars  should  treat  this  new  incident  as  if  it  were  of  no  import- 
ance whatever.  When  he  was  told  by  Stivey  that  Mrs.  Farrell 
had  found  the  Strong  Room  open  when  she  came  in  the  morning, 
he  said,  "  Did  she  ?"  or  "  Is  that  so  ?"  went  upstairs  to  his  own 
room,  and  took  no  further  notice  of  the  incident.  He  did  not 
even  examine  the  Strong  Room  to  see  if  anything  had  been 
taken,  he  did  not  examine  the  safe  to  see  if  it  had  been  tampered 
with,  he  did  not  send  for  Detective  Kerr  to  see  if  he  had  noticed 
anything  wrong  the  night  before,  he  made  no  communication  to 
the  Police.  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  has  given  his  own  explanation  of 
his  conduct  on  this  occasion,  and  it  seems  to  us  wholly  insufficient : 
— "  On  Saturday,  6th  July,  I  arrived  at  the  office  at  about  11 
a.m.  I  have  a  vague  recollection  of  being  told  by  Stivey  that 
Mrs.  Farrell  had  found  the  Strong  Room  door  open  when  she 
arrived,  but  at  the  time  I  did  not  realise  that  it  was  that  morn- 
ing, and  being  very  busy  left  the  matter  for  subsequent  investi- 
gation. It  was  not  until  Sunday  afternoon,  when  I  was  working 
at  my  house  in  connexion  with  the  Royal  Visit  with  Horlock, 


that  I  realised  that  the  Strong  Room  door  was  open  on  Saturday 
morning.  Horlock  had  informed  me  at  my  house  on  Sunday 
that  Stivey  had  told  me  in  my  office  on  Saturday  that  the  Strong 
Room  door  was  found  open  that  morning."  (Sir  Arthur  Vicars' 
Statement  of  12th  July — Appendix  A).  It  is  hardly  necessary 
to  comment  upon  the  strange  want  of  any  sense  of  responsibility 
for  the  security  of  his  office  and  of  the  Jewels  entrusted  to  his 
care  which  this  statement  reveals.  The  door  of  his  office  had 
been  found  open  on  the  previous  Wednesday ;  he  is  now  told 
that  the  door  of  the  Strong  Room  had  been  found  open  ;  he  has 
only  a  vague  recollection  of  this  startling  statement ;  he  does 
not  take  the  trouble  to  ascertain  definitely  even  the  day  on 
which  the  event  had  happened  ;  and  he  thinks  it  a  matter  that 
may  be  left  for  subsequent  investigation.  We  can  only  say  that, 
in  our  opinion,  Sir  Arthur  Vicars'  treatment  of  this  incident 
shows  an  entire  absence  of  vigilance  and  care  in  the  custody  of 
the  Jewels. 

13.  It  was  between  12.30  and  1  p.m.  on  Saturday,  6th  July, 
that  Stivey  told  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  about  the  Strong  Room 
having  been  found  open.  About  2.15  p.m.  on  the  same  day 
Stivey  went  to  Sir  Arthur  Vicars'  room  to  inquire  whether  he 
might  go  for  the  day.  Sir  Arthur  gave  him  the  key  of  the  safe, 
and  the  box  containing  the  Collar  of  a  deceased  Knight  of  St. 
Patrick  which  had  just  been  returned,  and  told  him  to  open  the 
safe  and  place  the  collar  in  it.  This  was  the  first  time  that  Stivey 
ever  had  the  key  of  the  safe  in  his  hand.  It  seems  strange  that 
Stivey  should  at  any  time  have  been  entrusted  with  the  key  of 
the  safe,  but  that  he  should  have  been  entrusted  with  it  just 
after  the  occurrence  of  incidents  which  call  for  peculiar  care 
seems  stranger  still.  Stivey  proceeded  to  the  safe  and  tried  to 
open  it.  He  found,  in  the  way  which  is  fully  described  in  his 
evidence,  that  the  safe  was  actually  unlocked.  He  did  not  open 
the  safe.  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  came  downstairs  immediately,  and 
Stivey  told  him  the  safe  was  not  locked.  Sir  Arthur  thereupon 
opened  the  safe,  and  found  that  the  Jewels  and  all  the  Collars 
and  Badges  in  the  safe  were  gone.  The  cases  which  had  con- 
tained the  Jewels,  Collars,  and  Badges  had  all  been  carefully 
replaced,  but  a  case  containing  his  mother's  diamonds,  which 
was  locked  and  the  key  of  which  was  in  the  hands  of  Mr. 
George  Mahony,  his  half-brother,  had  been  removed.  The 
police  were  then  sent  for  and  told  what  had  happened,  and 
even  then  not  a  word  was  said  about  the  Strong  Room  having 
been  found  open  that  very  morning.  When  Superintendent 
Lowe  said,  "  What  about*  the  Strong  Room  ? "  Sir  Arthur 
replied,  "  It  is  a  modern  safe,  a  Milner's  safe,  and  quite  secure  ; 
it  could  not  be  opened  except  by  its  own  key."  Nobody  on 


Saturday,  the  6th,  mentioned  to  the  police  either  that  the  outer 
door  had  been  found  open  on  the  morning  of  Wednesday  or 
that  the  Strong  Room  had  been  found  open  on  that  morning 
(Saturday),  and  it  was  only  on  Sunday,  the  7th,  that  Detective 
Kerr  heard  these  facts  from  Mrs.  Farrell  for  the  first  time. 

14.  The  lock  of  the  Strong  Room  was  carefully  examined  on 
Monday,  8th  July,  by  Mr.  F.  J.  O'Hare,  a  Dublin  represen- 
tative of  the  Milner  Safe  Company,  who  supplied  the  door  and 
lock  of  the  Strong  Room.     He  took  the  lock  to  pieces  and  took 
out  the  seven  levers.     He  found  no  trace  whatever  of  tamper- 
ing with   the  lock.     There   was  not  a   scratch  on  the  highly 
polished  levers.     The  Ratner  safe,  in  which  the  Jewels  were 
kept,  was  examined  on  the  9th  July  by  Cornelius  Gallacher,  an 
employe  of  Ratner's  agents  in  Dublin.     He  removed  the  lock 
and  chamber,  took  all  the  levers  out,  and  found  no  trace  of 
tampering  or  any  scratch  on  the  levers.     Both  these  experts 
came  to  the  same  conclusion  ;  that  there  was  no  picking  of  the 
locks  or  attempt  at  picking  ;    that  the  locks  were  opened  by 
their  own  keys  or  keys  identical  with  them  in  every  respect  in 
make  and  finish,  and  that  such  keys  could  not  be  fabricated 
from  a  wax  impression.     Keys  fabricated  from  a  wax  impres- 
sion, though  they  would  have  opened  the  locks,  would,  in  their 
opinion,  have  left  on  the  levers  traces  of  pressure  and  friction 
which  would  be  easily  discernible. 

15.  If  the  person  who  stole  the  Jewels  was,  as  we  believe  he 
was,  the  same  person  who  entered  the  Office  of  Arms  on  the 
night  of  Tuesday,  2nd  July,  and  again  on  the  night  of  Friday, 
5th  July,  it  is  clear  that  he  possessed  three  keys — a  latch-key 
for  the  outer  door,  a  key  of  the  Strong  Room,  and  a  key  of  the 
safe.     As  there  were  at  least  seven  latch-keys  outstanding  and 
carried  about  in  the  pockets  of  the  persons  who  used  them, 
there  could  be  no  great  difficulty  in  obtaining  possession  of  a 
latch-key.     Sir  Arthur  Vicars  told   Sergeant  Sheehan  on  the 
20th  September  that  his  own  latch-key  had  been  lost  on  the 
previous  28th  June,  and  that  he  did  not  recover  it  until  the  9th 
or  10th  July,  when  it  was  found  on  his  dressing-table.     It  is 
evident  that  this  latch-key  of  Sir  Arthur  Vicars',  in  whatever 
hands  it  was,  might  have  been  used  to  open  the  door  at  any 
time  between  the  28th  June  and  the  9th  July.     There  were 
four  keys  of  the  Strong  Room.     One  of  these,  which  had  for  a 
short  time  been  in  possession  of  Mr.  Burtchaell,  was  at  the  date 
of  the  disappearance  of  the  Jewels,  and  for  a  year  before,  kept 
concealed  in   the  Strong  Room.     There  was  no  evidence  that 
this  key  had  ever  been  removed  from  the  Strong  Room  until 
after  the  discovery  of  the  loss  of  the  Jewels.     Another  key  of 
the  Strong  Room  was  in  possession  of  Mr.  P.  G.  Mahony,  Cork 


Herald.  Stivey  seemed  to  be  under  the  impression  that  Mr. 
Mahony's  key  was  in  the  Strong  Room  with  Mr.  Burtchaell's, 
but  we  are  satisfied,  on  Mr.  Mahony's  own  evidence,  that  his 
key  was  locked  up  in  a  desk  in  his  own  house  from  some  day  in 
April,  1907,  when  he  left  Dublin  on  account  of  his  health,  until 
the  evening  of  Saturday,  6th  July,  when  he  delivered  up  this 
key  to  Sir  Arthur  Vicars,  and  that  it  had  not  been  once  out  of 
his  desk  during  that  interval.  There  remain  only  Stivey's  key 
and  that  held  by  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  himself.  We  are  of  opinion 
that  the  Strong  Room  must  have  been  opened  on  the  night  of 
Friday,  5th  July,  by  one  or  other  of  these  keys,  or  else  by 
a  key  fabricated  by  a  skilled  workman  from  one  of  the  keys  of 
the  Strong  Room  as  a  model.  There  was  no  evidence  that  any 
of  these  keys  was  ever  out  of  its  holder's  possession  long  enough 
to  enable  a  false  key  to  be  made,  and  we  had  evidence  from  the 
Police  that  an  exhaustive  inquiry  had  been  made  amongst  all 
the  locksmiths  and  key  manufacturers  in  Dublin,  and  no  such 
key  had  been  made  by  any  of  them.  We  are  also  of  opinion 
with  Inspector  Kane,  of  Scotland  Yard,  that  it  is  difficult  to 
believe  that  any  thief  would  have  taken  the  trouble  and  risk  of 
getting  a  false  key  of  the  Strong  Room  fabricated,  except  for 
the  purpose-  of  removing  the  valuables  from  the  glass  case 
therein.  The  person  who  opened  the  Strong  Room  on  the  night 
of  Friday,  5th  July,  touched  nothing  in  it. 

16.  We  can.not  attribute  negligence  to  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  in 
the  custody  of  his  key  of  the  Strong  Room.     He  seems  to  have 
taken  as  much  care  of  it  as  any  man  could  do  of  a  key  which 
he  carried  about  with  him,   and  which  was  in  constant  use. 
We     have    already    expressed    an     opinion    that    it    was    an 
imprudent  thing  to  give  a  key  of  the  Strong  Room  to  a  man 
in  Stivey's  position,  though  he  were  fully  convinced  of  Stivey's 
probity.     Stivey  himself  says  that  he  knew  of  no  reason  for  his 
having  this  key  except  that  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  wanted  him  to 
carry  a  key. 

17.  There  were  only  two  keys  of  the  safe,  both  in  the  posses- 
sion  of    Sir  Arthur   Vicars.      We  are  of   opinion,   upon   the 
evidence,  that  the  safe  could  only  have  been  opened  by  one  of 
these  two  keys,  or  by  a  key  made  by  a  skilled  workman  from 
one  of  these  keys  as  a  model.     The  following  is  Sir  Arthur 
Vicars'  own  account  of  the  way  in  which  the  two  keys  were 
kept : — "  So  far  as  I  know  there  are  only  two  keys  for  the  safe, 
which  are  always  in  my  custody.  .  .  .  The  key  of  the  safe  which 
I  use  I  always  carry  with  me  along  with  other  keys  on  a  steel 
ring,  except  on  full-dress  nights,  when  I  remove  it  from  the 
bunch  and  carry  it  on  a  ring  of  its  own  in  my  uniform  coat 
pocket ;  the  other  key  for  the  safe  I  have  always  kept  concealed 


in  my  residence.  ...  I  recollect  leaving  the  key  of  the  safe  in 
my  writing  table  at  my  residence  about  two  months  ago,  but 
the  keys,  with  safe  key  included,  were  brought  to  me  to  my 
office  by  my  servant,  Frederick  Pitt,  within  an  hour.  The  keys 
were  found  by  my  maidservant  in  my  writing  desk,  and  she 
directed  Pitt  to  bring  them  to  the  Castle  to  me."  (Statement 
of  12th  July,  1907— Appendix  A.)  A  further  statement  was 
made  by  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  about  the  second  key  of  the  safe  to 
Mr.  Harrel,  Assistant  Commissioner  of  the  Dublin  Metropolitan 
Police,  on  the  afternoon  of  Saturday,  6th  July,  the  day  on  which 
the  loss  of  the  jewels  was  discovered  : — "  He  told  me  he  had  a 
second  key  for  the  safe,  and  that  that  key  was  in  a  drawer  in 
a  writing  table  in  his  own  house.  I  said  to  him,  *  Would  you 
go  and  see  whether  that  key  is  now  there  ? '  He  said  he  had  so 
much  to  do  that  he  could  not  go  then,  but  would  go  at  the 
earliest  moment  possible — about  7  o'clock.  I  asked  him  to  let 
me  know  at  once  when  he  went  home  whether  the  key  was 
there,  and  he  said  he  would.  And  he  telephoned  to  me  that 
evening  that  the  key  was  there  just  as  he  had  left  it,  and  that  he 
could  see  no  trace  of  it  having  been  tampered  with." 

18.  We  cannot  acquit  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  of  want  of  proper 
care  in  the  custody  of  the  keys  of  the  safe.    These  keys  unlocked 
the  safe  which    contained  Jewels  of  enormous  value  and  im- 
portance,   for    whose    safety    Sir    Arthur    Vicars    was    wholly 
responsible.     The  safe  was  placed  in  a  room  which  was  easily 
accessible  by  day  to  everybody,  and  by  night  to  anybody  who 
could  get  possession  of  a  latch-key.     The  position  and  value  of 
these  Jewels  must  have  been  known  to  very  many  people,  as  Sir 
Arthur  Vicars  was  in  the  habit  of  showing  them  freely  to  casual 
visitors  in  the  Library,  where  people  were  passing  in  and  out. 
It  was  not  necessary  to  open   the  safe  except  upon  very  rare 
occasions.     Sir  Arthur  Vicars  himself  says  : — "  I  seldom  have 
occasion  to  open  it."     (Statement  of  18th  July,  1907 — Appendix 
A.)     It  appears  on  his  own  statement  that  he  did  not  open  the 
safe  between  llth  June  and  6th  July  of  1907.     Under  these 
circumstances  it  appears  to  us  that  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  ought  not 
to  have  carried  about  a  key  of  the  safe  or  left  one  in  his  own 
house.     He  ought  to  have  deposited  the  two  keys  of  the  safe  in 
a  strong  room  at  his  Banker's  or  in  some  other  place  of  equal 
security,  and  only  taken  out  one  when  it  was  necessary  to  open 
the  safe,  and  returned  it  again  to  its  place  of  security  as  soon  as 
the  occasion  for  using  it  was  over. 

1 9.  We  have  thus  given  Your  Excellency  a  statement  of  all 
the  essential  facts  and  circumstances  connected  with  the  loss  of 
the  Crown  Jewels  and  of  the  conclusions  we  have  drawn  from 
them  as  to  the  vigilance  and  care  exercised  by  Sir  Arthur 


Vicars  in  their  custody.  Your  Excellency  will  observe  that  the 
main  facts  on  which  we  base  any  conclusion  affecting  Sir  Arthur 
Vicars  are  not  in  controversy.  There  has  been  no  conflict  of 
evidence  as  to  these  facts  before  us,  and  there  is  nothing  to 
contradict  them  in  the  various  statements  made  by  Sir  Arthur 
Vicars  himself  to  the  Police. 

20.  We  are  very  sorry  that  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  did  not  appear 
before  us  to  give  evidence  or  to  assist  us,  through  his  Counsel, 
in   the   examination   or   cross-examination  of   other  witnesses. 
We  think  the  reasons  assigned  for  his  refusal  to  assist'  us  are 
wholly  insufficient.     Objection  was  at  first  taken  to  our  Inquiry 
being  held  in  private.     We  were  ready  to  hear  an  application 
for  a  Public  Inquiry  and  to  grant  it,  if  good  reason  had  been 
shown  for  it,  but  as  soon  as  we  intimated  our  readiness  to  hear 
such  an  application  it  was  withdrawn,  and  the  objection  to  our 
Commission    based   on    other    and   wholly   different    grounds. 
Objection  was  taken  to  the  terms  of  the  reference,  though  we 
think  that  the  terms  of  the  reference  were  wide  enough  to 
embrace  every  matter  in  relation  to  the  loss  of  the  Crown 
Jewels  in  which  Sir  Arthur  Vicars'  conduct  as  their  custodian 
was  involved.     Objection  was  taken  to  the  powers  of  the  Com- 
mission, although  we  possessed  every  power  which  any  Royal  or 
Viceregal   Commission   can   possess  without   a   special   Act   of 
Parliament.     The  absence  of  power  to  compel  the  attendance  of 
witnesses  was  made  a  matter  of  objection  by  Sir  Arthur  Vicars 
and  his  counsel ;  but  the  only  witnesses  asked  by  us  to  attend 
who  refused  to  come,  in  addition  to  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  himself, 
were  Mr.  Horlock,  his  clerk,  and  Miss  Gibbon,  the  typist,  both 
of  -whom  based  their  refusal  on  the  ground  of  the  supposed 
interest   of   Sir   Arthur  Vicars.     We   do   not   think   that   the 
administration  of  an  oath  would  have  affected  the  results  of  an 
Inquiry  in  which  there  was  little  conflict  of  evidence  as  to  the 
details,  and  in  which  all  the  salient  and  essential  facts  were 
agreed  upon  by  everybody  interested. 

21.  When  much  evidence  had  been  given  before  us  which 
seemed  to  us  to  show  great  want  of  due  care  and  vigilance  on 
Sir  Arthur  Vicars'  part  in  the  custody  of  the  lost  Jewels,  we 
thought  it  only  fair  to  give  him  another  opportunity  of  appear- 
ing before  us  and  telling  his  own  story  in  person.     (See  corre- 
spondence with    Sir   Arthur   Vicars — Appendix   D.)      On   the 
application   of    the    Solicitor-General   we  agreed    to  take  his 
evidence  and  that  of  any  witnesses  he  might  suggest,  in  public, 
if  he  so  desired.     Sir  Arthur  Vicars  refused  this  offer,  and  we 
have  not  had  the  advantage  of  hearing  from  himself  directly  his 
account  of  the  various  matters  and  occurrences  in  which  he  was 
concerned.     In  these  circumstances  it  is  a  great  satisfaction  to 


us  to  be  able  to  say  that,  having  carefully  examined  and  con- 
sidered every  statement  which  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  has  made 
either  in  writing  or  orally  relating  to  the  subject  of  our 
Inquiry,  we  cannot  find  any  conflict  between  him  and  the 
witnesses  examined  before  us  as  to  any  matter  of  fact  relevant 
to  our  Inquiry. 

22..  Although  it  was  no  part  of  our  duty  under  Your 
Excellency's  Warrant  to  conduct  a  criminal  investigation  into 
the  robbery  of  the  Jewels,  or  to  take  evidence  with  a  view  to 
the  ascertainment  of  the  thief,  yet  as,  on  the  evidence  given 
before  us  and  now  in  print,  it  appears  that  the  name  of  Mr. 
Francis  Richard  Shackleton  was  more  than  once  named  as  that 
of  the  probable  or  possible  author  of  this  great  crime,  we  think 
it  only  due  to  that  gentleman  to  say  that  he  came  from  San 
Remo  at  great  inconvenience  to  give  evidence  before  us,  that  he 
appeared  to  us  to  be  a  perfectly  truthful  and  candid  witness, 
and  that  there  was  no  evidence  whatever  before  us  which  would 
support  the  suggestion  that  he  was  the  person  who  stole  the 

23.  Having  fully  investigated  all  the  circumstances  connected 
with  the  loss  of  the  Regalia  of  the  Order  of  St.  Patrick,  and 
having  examined  and  considered  carefully  the  arrangements  of 
the  Office  of  Arms  in  which  the  Regalia  were  deposited,  and  the 
provisions  made  by  Sir  Arthur  Vicars,  or  under  his  direction, 
for  their  safe  keeping,  and  having  regard  especially  to  the 
inactivity  of  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  on  the  occasions  immediately 
preceding  the  disappearance  of  the  Jewels,  when  he  knew  that 
the  Office  and  the  Strong  Room  had  been  opened  at  night  by 
unauthorised  persons,  we  feel  bound  to  report  to  Your 
Excellency  that,  in  our  opinion,  Sir  Arthur  Vicars  did  not 
exercise  due  vigilance  or  proper  care  as  the  custodian  of  the 

We  desire  to  express  our  obligations  to  our  Secretary,  Mr.  C. 
T.  Beard,  of  the  Chief  Secretary's  Office,  for  the  valuable 
assistance  he  gave  us  in  the  conduct  of  our  Inquiry. 

All  which  we  humbly  submit  for  Your  Excellency's  con- 


C.  T.  BEARD,  Secretary, 
25th  January,  1908. 



EXERCISE  No.    10. 

AT  Clerkenwell,  yesterday,  Herbert  Druce,  of  The  Beeches, 
Circus  Road,  St.  John's  Wood,  again  appeared  before  Mr. 
Plowden  to  answer  the  summons  charging  him  with  having 
committed  perjury  in  an  affidavit  sworn  by  him  on  March  28, 
1898,  at  The  Beeches,  Circus  Road,  and  also  in  the  evidence  he 
gave  in  the  Probate  Court  on  December  3  and  4,  1901,  in  an 
action  brought  against  the  executors  of  the  will  of  Mr.  T.  C. 
Druce,  the  defendant's  father,  for  the  revocation  of  probate. 
The  action  failed,  however,  and  the  will  was  pronounced  for. 
Both  in  the  affidavit  and  in  the  evidence  in  the  Probate  Court 
the  defendant  swore  that  his  father,  Mr.  T.  C.  Druce,  the 
proprietor  of  the  Baker  Street  Bazaar,  died  on  December  28, 
1864,  and  that  he  saw  him  lying  dead.  This  was  asserted  by 
the  prosecution  to  be  untrue,  and  that  Mr.  T.  C.  Druce  was  in 
reality  the  fifth  Duke  of  Portland,  who  did  not  die  until  1879, 
and  that  a  mock  funeral  was  arranged  so  that  the  duke  might 
relinquish  his  dual  personality. 

Mr.  Atherley-Jones,  K.C.,  and  Mr.  Sydney  Goodman  prose- 
cuted; Mr.  Horace  Avory,  K.C.,  Sir  Charles  Mathews,  and  Mr. 
Ronald  Walker  represented  the  defendant ;  Mr.  S.  A.  T. 
Rowlatt  watched  the  case  on  behalf  of  the  Duke  of  Portland 
and  Lord  Howard  de  Walden ;  Mr.  T.  E.  Crispe,  K.C.,  and  Mr. 
C.  H.  Swanton  were  present  in  the  interest  of  the  shareholders 
of  G.  H.  Druce  (Limited);  Mr.  J.  A.  T.  Good  appeared  for  a 
person  interested. 

This  was  the  14th  hearing. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews  proceeded  to  call  evidence  with  regard 


to  the  exhumation  at  Highgate,  his  first  witness  being  Mr. 
Leslie  Robert  Vigers,  a  member  of  the  Institute  of  Surveyors, 
of  Frederick's  Place,  Old  Jewry.  He  said  he  attended  the 
Highgate  Cemetery  on  Sunday,  December  29,  and  made  a 
careful  inspection  of  the  Druce  vault.  Under  his  supervision 
the  monument  was  removed. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — And  how  far  down  was  an  excavation 
made? — There  was  no  excavation.  The  marble  kerbs  were 
removed,  but  the  vault  was  not  opened. 

That  was  the  point  reached  as  the  result  of'  the  Sunday 
afternoon's  work  ? — Yes. 

Did  you  attend  again  on  Monday  morning?— Yes. 

And  did  you  find  the  vault  and  everything  in  the  same  condi- 
tion as  you  had  left  it? — I  did. 

And  in  your  presence  were  the  marble  slabs  and  York  stones 
removed  ? — Yes ;  and  they  were  rolled  away  to  the  side. 

On  that  being  done,  did  anything  come  to  view? — Yes,  a 
portion  of  Mrs.  Druce's  coffin,  which  was  resting  on  a  stone 
floor.  The  marble  slab  and  York  stones  on  the  other  half  of 
the  vault  were  removed  in  the  same  way. 

And  was  the  effect  to  bring  into  view  the  whole  of  the 
coffin  ? — It  was. 

What  was  done  with  the  coffin? — It  was  raised  and  placed  to 
the  side  of  the  vault. 

Were  you  then  able  to  see  and  examine  the  stone  floor  on 
which  it  rested? — Yes;  it  consisted  of  eight  York  stone  slabs 
about  l^in.  in  thickness.  They  were  jointed  with  cement,  and 
cement  was  filled  in  all  round  against  the  wall. 

And  were  some  men  sent  down  to  cut  out  the  joints? — Yes, 
and  the  stones  were  raised. 

And  when  that  had  been  done,  what  was  disclosed  ? — There 
was  a  wall  up  the  centre  of  the  vault  making  two  compartments. 
There  were  two  coffins  there — one  adult  coffin  and  one  child's. 

Whose  did  the  adult  coffin  turn  out  to  be? — The  coffin  turned 
out  when  raised  to  be  that  of  Thomas  Charles  Druce. 

Of  what  was  the  vault  constructed? — Brick,  with  a  brick 
floor  laid  in  cement.  It  was  ordinary  brickwork  pointed  up 
and  whitened. 

As  far  as  you  could  see,  did  the  vault  appear  to  be  in  the 
condition  in  which  it  was  originally  constructed? — Certainly. 

Were  any  of  the  bricks  removed  in  the  floor? — Yes,  in  the 
half  where  the  coffin  had  been  removed  a  number  of  bricks  were 
taken  out  from  about  the  centre,  near  the  western  end,  with  a 
crowbar,  and  the  clay  was  exposed.  The  crowbar  was  then 
driven  in  as  far  as  a  man  was  able  in  two  places,  and  the  clay 
was  found  to  be  quite  solid. 


Let  us  have  the  depth  the  crowbar  was  driven  in  ? — It  was 
13in.  in  the  centre  and  IG^in.  at  the  other  point. 

Was  it  what  is  called  virgin  soil? — Yes,  it  was  apparently 
virgin  clay. 

Was  any  lead  of  any  description  found  anywhere  in  the  vault 
or  beneath  it  to  the  depth  of  16^in.  ? — No. 

You  told  us  you  saw  the  coffin  which  afterwards  proved  to 
be  that  of  T.  C.  Druce.  I  believe  you  saw  it  subsequently  to 
its  being  raised  and  laid  aside  ? — I  did. 

Can  you  tell  us,  had  it  a  brass  plate  upon  it  ? — Yes. 

And  an  inscription?— Yes.  The  inscription  ran: — "Thomas 
Charles  Druce,  Esq.  Died  28th  Dec.,  1864,  in  his  71st  year." 

Cross-examined  by  Mr.  Atherley- Jones. — As  I  understand, 
you  are  satisfied  as  far  as  you  can  judge  that  both  the  grave 
and  the  coffin  had  not  been  tampered  with? — Certainly. 

And  also  that  they  pointed,  so  far  as  your  judgment  could  go, 
to  having  been  undisturbed  since  about  the  year  1864? — Yes. 

Mr.  Avory. — To  prevent  misapprehension,  let  me  ask  you, 
when  you  say  "undisturbed  since  1864,"  is  it  not  clear  that  the 
stone  on  which  the  coffin  of  Mrs.  Druce  was  had  been  built  in 
after  its  original  construction? — Quite  so. 

Mr.  Avory  then  called  Mr.  Augustus  Joseph  Pepper,  surgeon, 
St.  Mary's  Hospital,  and  adviser  to  the  Home  Office  for  the 
Metropolitan  Police,  who  said  that  on  Monday,  December  30,  at 
10.20  a.m.,  he  arrived  at  the  Highgate  Cemetery,  accompanied 
by  Sir  Thomas  Stevenson.  On  arriving  at  the  vault  which  bore 
the  monument  of  Thomas  Charles  Druce  he  found  it  already 
open  to  the  bottom.  It  was  a  brick-built  vault,  with  a  brick 
floor.  The  walls  and  floor  of  the  vault  had  the  appearance  of 
having  been  undisturbed  since  their  construction.  He  was 
present  when  the  experiment  was  made  with  the  crowbar.  He 
agreed  that  the  soil  had  been  undisturbed  ;  it  was  virgin  soil. 
On  the  floor  of  the  vault  he  saw  three  coffins.  The  coffin  bear- 
ing the  plate  of  T.  C.  Druce  was  by  itself  in  the  left-hand 
compartment.  He  saw  other  inscriptions  on  the  other  coffins 
there.  The  coffin  bearing  the  inscription  of  Thomas  Charles 
Druce  was  raised  under  his  supervision.  The  coffin  was  covered 
with  blackish  coloured  cloth.  On  the  lid,  besides  the  inscription 
plate,  there  were  some  brass  nails,  and  at  the  head  there  was  a 
trefoil  brass  cross.  At  the  bottom  was  a  Maltese  brass  cross. 
The  inscription  on  the  plate  was  as  follows  : — "  Thomas  Charles 
Druce,  Esqre.  Died  28  Deer.,  1864.  In  his  71  year."  In 
opening  the  oak  coffin  he  found  a  lead  coffin.  There  was  an 
inscription  also  on  that : — "  Thomas  Charles  Druce,  Esq.  Died 
28  Dec."  The  lead  coffin  had  been,  and  was  still,  airtight.  The 
lid  of  the  coffin  was  removed  in  his  presence.  That  disclosed  an 


inner  shell,  the  lid  of  which  came  away  with  the  lid  of  the  lead 
coffin.  In  the  shell  he  saw  the  shape  of  a  human  body  covered 
by  a  shroud  of  white  cambric,  figured  near  the  margin. 

Mr.  Avory. — Was  there  anything  over  the  face? — A  linen 
handkerchief  about  the  size  of  a  pocket  handkerchief. 

Any  mark  on  it  ?— The  initials  "T.  C.  D."  and  the  figure  "  12." 

On  removing  the  sheet  in  which  the  body  was  wrapped  what 
did  you  find  the  body  to  be  ? — A  male  body,  aged. 

By  "aged"  what  do  you  mean? — I  should  say  from  65 
to  75. 

And  about  what  height  ? — The  actual  length  of  the  body  as  it 
lay  in  the  coffin  was  5ft.  7-iin.,  and  allowing  fin.  for  shrinkage 
after  death  would  make  it  5ft.  8^in.  to  5ft.  9in. 

Speaking  of  it  generally,  what  was  the  state  of  preservation  ? 
— It  was  extremely  well  preserved.  The  skin  was  only  broken 
in  one  part  of  the  body. 

Was  it  sufficiently  preserved  for  the  features  to  be  recog- 
nised ? — Oh,  quite  easily. 

Before  you  describe  the  details,  tell  me  had  you  on  you  at  the 
time  this  photograph  ? — Yes,  it  is  the  photograph  marked  "  8." 

Mr.  Avory  pointed  out  that  the  photograph  had  been  ex- 
hibited in  the  legal  proceedings,  and  showed  the  subject  in  a 
standing  position. 

Mr.  Avory. — With  that  photograph  in  your  possession  did 
you  form,  Mr.  Pepper,  your  view  as  to  the  identity  of  the  body  ? 
— There  was  a  striking  resemblance.  There  was  a  striking 
general  resemblance,  and  upon  comparing  particular  points  the 
resemblance  was  also  marked. 

How  would  you  describe  the  face  and  head  to  be  ? — The  head 
was  covered  with  scanty  reddish  brown  hair,  with  a  small  part 
white.  It  was  parted  neatly  on  the  left  side.  One  side  was 
brushed  slightly  over  the  forehead.  The  eyebrows  were  rather 
thick  and  wavy.  He  also  had  a  moustache,  reddish  brown  in 
colour  and  dropping  straight  over  the  upper  lip.  The  whiskers 
and  beard  were  of  a  reddish  brown  colour,  with  a  good  deal  of 
white,  and  the  beard  was  very  bushy.  The  hair  was  coarse. 

The  whole  of  this  hair  on  the  head  and  face  that  you  are 
describing  was  natural  hair? — Yes,  and  still  attached  to  the 
skin  ;  it  had  not  fallen  off  anywhere. 

Did  you  notice  anything  about  the  outline  of  the  whiskers  on 
the  face  ? — Yes,  it  is  exactly  as  shown  in  the  photograph.  It 
had  the  appearance  as  if  he  had  been  shaved  in  the  upper  parts 
of  the  face. 

To  put  it  in  another  way,  it  commences  in  a  distinct  line  ? — 
Yes,  exactly  as  shown  in  this  photograph. 

Upon  examining  the  body,  did  you  find  any  difference  in  the 


lower  region — in  the  state  of  preservation  ? — Oh,  yes.  In  the 
lower  region  of  the  trunk  there  was  extreme  decay. 

Is  that  what  you  would  expect  to  find  if  the  man  had  suffered 
from  fistula  and  abscesses  in  that  region  ? — It  is  quite  clear  he 
had  suffered  from  some  destructive  disease  of  that  kind. 

Look  at  the  certificate  showing  the  cause  of  death.  Is  the 
cause  given  consistent  with  the  appearances  that  you  found  ? — 
Yes.  The  only  thing  is  there  is  no  mention  made  in  the  docu- 
ment of  the  part  affected.  What  I  saw  indicated  that  there  had 
been  gangrene  in  that  part  of  the  body. 

Having  made  this  examination  and  your  notes  upon  it,  did 
you  witness  the  replacement  of  the  body  in  the  coffin  ? — Yes. 

And  the  return  of  the  coffin  to  its  original  place  in  the  vault  ? 
-I  did. 

With  the  exception  of  the  lead  of  which  the  lead  coffin  was 
composed,  was  there  any  lead  found  in  or  about  this  coffin  at 
all  ?— No. 

Or  in  the  vault  ? — No.  Of  course  the  other  coffins  were  not 

Was  Mr.  Thackrah  present  with  you  at  the  time  the  coffin 
was  opened  ? — He  was. 

Mr.  Atherley-Jones,  on  rising  to  cross-examine,  said  that  he 
did  not  propose  to  ask  any  questions  of  the  witness  in  a  critical 
spirit,  but  for  the  purpose  of  fuller  elucidation.  "  Will  you  tell 
me,"  he  said,  "  whether  you  made  any  investigation  to  discover 
whether  there  were  any  traces  of  chloride  of  lime  ?"  Mr. 
Pepper  replied  that  there  were  marks  about  the  middle  of  the 
body  which  might  have  been  chloride  of  lime. 

Mr.  Atherley-Jones. — You  also  spoke  about  a  shroud.  Was 
the  body  in  a  sheet  ? — I  think  to  the  ordinary  observer  it  would 
appear  to  be  a  sheet.  It  was  only  on  unfolding  it  that  one 
could  see  what  the  material  was. 

To  Mr.  Plowden. — Human  hair  may  increase  after  death  for 
a  few  days  ;  but  there  was  no  substantial  growth.  It  was 
really  a  shrinking  of  the  skin. 

By  Mr.  Atherley-Jones. — The  beard  on  the  face  was  like  that 
in  the  photograph  No.  9.  It  was  a  bushy  beard. 

Mr.  Avory  then  put  in  Mr.  Pepper's  report. 

At  this  point  Mr.  Plowden  interposed,  and,  addressing  Mr. 
Atherley-Jones,  said: — I  think  I  must  ask  you  now  at  this  stage 
of  the  case  what  impression  this  remarkable  evidence  has  made 
on  your  mind  ? 

Mr.  Atherley-Jones. — I  am  very  grateful  to  you  for  that 
suggestion.  I  was  going  to  ask  your  leave  to  make  a  statement, 
but  I  did  not  know  whether  my  learned  friend  Mr.  Avory 
wished  to  call  some  other  witnesses  on  the  question  of  the 


exhumation.  If  so  I  wish  to  withhold  what  I  have  to  say  until 
he  has  concluded. 

Mr.  Avory  replied  that  he  had  another  witness,  and,  having 
named  him,  said  he  should  like  to  put  him  into  the  box. 

George  William  Thackrah,  of  Sunnyside,  Woodbury  Road, 
Finsbury  Park,  a  partner  in  the  business  of  Messrs.  Druce 
&  Co.,  of  Baker  Street,  said  that  he  first  entered  that  business 
in  May,  1860.  Mi1.  Thomas  Charles  Druce  employed  him.  It 
was  at  that  time  his  business  in  conjunction  with  his  partner. 
He  had  largely  to  attend  on  Mr.  Druce  and  carry  out  his 
instructions.  Mr.  Druce  was  a  regular  attendant  at  the 

Mr.  Atherley-Jones,  interposing,  said  that  he  did  not  wish 
any  further  burden  should  be  cast  on  his  friend  Mr.  Avory,  in 
going  into  matters  apart  from  the  exhumation.  He  understood 
that  the  evidence  of  the  witness  was  to  be  confined  to  that 

Mr.  Avory. — You  must  leave  that  to  me  to  determine  what  is 

Mr.  Atherley-Jones. — I  only  say  so  far  as  I  am  concerned  I 
do  not  wish  to  impose  on  my  friend  the  necessity  of  going 

The  witness,  continuing,  said  that  he  was  connected  with  Mr. 
Druce  about  four  years  until  the  August  or  September  before 
his  death  in  1864.  Mr.  Druce  then  left  the  business  because  he 
was  ill,  and  the  witness  never  saw  him  alive  again.  When  he 
last  saw  him  he  was  wearing  a  beard  such  as  was  shown  in  the 
photograph  produced.  Subsequently  he  attended  his  funeral 
on  December  31,1 864,  at  Highgate  Cemetery.  On  Monday  last, 
December  30,  he  went  to  Highgate  Cemetery  and  there  saw  the 
coffin  with  "Thomas  Charles  Druce"  on  it  opened.  He  saw  a 
body  in  it,  and  the  face  he  recognised  distinctly  as  that  of  the 
late  Mr.  Thomas  Charles  Druce,  the  man  whom  he  knew  from 
1860  to  1864. 

Mr.  Plowden. — You  recognised  him  beyond  a  shadow  of 
doubt  ? — Oh,  yes,  beyond  a  shadow  of  doubt.  There  is  no  doubt 
whatever  about  it. 

Mr.  Avory  intimated  that  with  that  evidence  he  should  now 
close  the  case  for  the  defence.  He  also  pointed  out  that  the 
magistrate  had  before  him  the  evidence  which  Mr.  Herbert 
Druce  himself  gave  in  the  shorthand  notes,  and  every  word  that 
Mr.  Herbert  Druce  then  said  with  regard  to  the  details  of  the 
death  and  burial  of  his  father  had  been  demonstrated  to  be 
absolutely  true. 

Mr.  Atherley-Jones  complained  of  Mr.  Avory's  remark  about 
closing  his  case  when  he  (Mr.  Atherley-Jones)  had  already 


received  an  intimation  from  the  magistrate  that  he  desired  to 
hear  a  statement  from  the  prosecution. 

Mr.  Avory  asked  on  what  ground  counsel  based  his  objection, 
and  said  he  was  in  command  of  defendant's  case. 

Mr.  Atherley- Jones  said  that  he  made  no  further  comment 
save  this,  that  his  learned  friend  Mr.  Avory  heard  of  the  invi- 
tation from  the  magistrate  to  express  the  views  of  the  prosecution, 
and  he  then,  exercising,  as  he  said,  "  his  command  of  his  own 
case,"  intervened  between  him  and  the  magistrate. 

Mr.  Atherley-Jones  then  addressed  the  Court  as  follows  : — 
Sir, — In  reply  to  your  inquiry  I  wish  to  give  very  shortly  the 
views  of  the  prosecution  with  regard  to  this  case,  and  I  ask  your 
indulgence  while  I  try  as  briefly  as  possible  to  state  the  attitude 
which  the  prosecution  takes.  You  were  good  enough,  when  the 
question  of  the  exhumation  of  this  body  was  first  mentioned,  to 
ask  me  in  a  certain  contingency  what  view  the  prosecution 
would  take  of  the  case.  I  then  answered  without  deliberation, 
and  indeed  without  opportunity  of  deliberation,  that  in  my 
judgment  it  would  be  practically  impossible  for  the  prosecution 
to  proceed.  Deliberation  and  anxious  consideration  since  the 
happening  of  that  event  have  confirmed  the  view  that  I  then 
entertained,  and  lead  me  to  the  conclusion  that  it  would  be,  even 
if  you  permitted  it,  which  I  apprehend  you  would  not,  it  would 
be  an  abuse  of  the  powers  or  prerogative  of  counsel  to  press 
forward  the  case  after  the  evidence  which  has  been  admitted  to- 
day. Sir,  I  therefore  have  no  hesitation  whatever  in  saying,  speak- 
ing for  myself  and  for  those  instructing  me — because  I  am  very 
glad  to  say  that  those  who  instruct  me  have  placed  unreservedly 
in  my  hands  the  disposition  of  this  case,  and  I  can  only  say  that, 
had  that  conclusion  been  different  on  their  part  there  would 
have  been  no  alternative  for  me  but  to  have  withdrawn  from  any 
further  participation  in  this  case — that  I  now  withdraw  the 
prosecution.  In  doing  so  I  wish  to  make  an  explanation  of  the 
action  of  those  who  instruct  me  in  this  matter,  because  there  has 
been  in  my  judgment  a  very  undeserved  obloquy  cast  on  those  who 
entered  on  this  prosecution  by  the  learned  counsel  for  the  defence. 

Mr.  Avory,  interrupting,  said  that,  if  the  magistrate  was 
going  to  allow  this,  he  should  claim  his  right  to  reply. 

Mr.  Plowden. — I  think  not,  Mr.  Avory. 

Mr.  Avory. — Mr.  Atherley-Jones  has  no  right  to  address  you 
at  all. 

Mr.  Plowden. — You  have  closed  your  case,  strictly  speaking, 
Mr.  Atherley-Jones  has  no  right  to  say  &  word,  but  I  think  Mr. 
Atherley-Jones  is  quite  right  in  saying  he  has  obtained  per- 
mission to  address  the  Court.  I  think  he  is  perfectly  right  to 
exercise  that  privilege,  therefore. 


Mr.  Avory. — All  I  ask  is  that,  if  you  give  him  the  privilege  of 
addressing  you,  you  should  give  me  the  privilege  of  reply. 

Mr.  Plowden. — I  will  consider  that  when  the  moment  comes. 

Mr.  Artherley- Jones  (continuing). — I  am  sorry  that  my  friend 
should  think  it  necessary  to  reply.  I  shall  not  indulge  in  any 
recriminations.  My  friend,  of  course,  has  acted  according  to  his 
discretion  with  his  instructions.  But  I  do  wish  to  say,  it  is  only 
fair  it  should  be  said,  that  this  prosecution,  so  far  as  I  under- 
stand—I had  no  onus  in  advising  upon  it — this  prosecution  was 
entered  into  as  a  consequence  and  result  of  a  large  body  of 
evidence  which  had  been  collected  and  was  submitted  to  this 
Court,  and  which  was,  with  the  exception  of  that  one  person, 
unshaken  in  material  points  by  the  strenuous  and  prolonged 
cross-examination  of  my  learned  friend.  Moreover,  we  cannot 
close  our  eyes  to  the  fact  that  it  was  known  to  those  who  instruct 
me,  as  it  was  known  to  the  public  at  large,  that  there  had 
been,  however  unfounded  they  might  be,  persistent  rumours, 
rumours  to  which  my  friend's  witness,  Miss  Bayly,  gives  the 
authority  of  her  evidence — rumours  as  to  something  mysterious 
in  relation  to  this  matter.  Therefore  I  do  think  I  am  justified 
in  saying  that  the  strictures  passed  on  those  who  instruct  me 
were  undeserved  with  regard  to  the  initiation  of  this  prosecution. 
Moreover,  speaking  as  I  am  entitled  to  do  as  counsel,  I  can  only 
say  with  regard  to  the  instructions  they  have  given  to  me — if  they 
were  errors  of  judgment  that  was  another  matter — but  as  to  the 
instructions  they  have  given  to  me,  I  have  never  through  the  course 
of  my  long  experience  at  the  Bar  recognised  any  stronger  dis- 
position on  the  part  of  solicitors  than  was  shown  by  those  who 
instruct  me,  to  seek  only  that  this  case  should  be  conducted  by 
reasonable  and  legitimate  ends.  I  would  like  to  say  that  why  I 
have  come  to  this  conclusion  not  to  further  proceed  in  this  case 
is  that  the  theory  of  the  prosecution  undoubtedly  was,  not  only 
that  Mr.  Thomas  Charles  Druce  and  the  late  Duke  of  Portland 
were  one  and  the  same  person,  but  the  theory  of  the  prosecution 
was  that  this  funeral  which  took  place  from  Baker  Street  was  a 
sham  funeral,  not  on  the  theory  of  any  supposititious  body,  but 
that  they  put  some  material  in  the  coffin  and  it  was  conveyed 
away  from  the  bazaar  under  pretence  of  a  death  having  occurred, 
apparently  to  Highgate  Cemetery.  It  is  impossible  after  the 
evidence  of  exhumation,  however  much  it  might  be  suggested 
outside  that  there  were  a  number  of  witnesses  who  had  sworn 
that  the  Duke  of  Portland  appeared  as  Thomas  Charles  Druce 
or  simulated  Thomas  Charles  Druce — it  is  impossible  for  me  to 
proceed  with  the  prosecution  when  there  has  been  demonstrated 
in  the  clearest  and  most  complete  manner  that  the  death  did 
take  place  at  Hendon,  that  the  body  was  interred  at  Highgate 


Cemetery,  and  that  the  body  which  has  been  now  exhumed  is 
the  same  body  as  that  which  was  then  interred,  and  when 
undoubtedly  strong,  very  strong,  evidence  of  identification  of 
that  body  as  that  of  the  late  Thomas  Charles  Bruce  has  been 
given.  And  I  should  be  acting  entirely  contrary  to  the  best 
traditions  of  my  profession  if  I  were  to  proceed  in  the  face  of 
that  evidence.  It  would  be  most  improper  for  me  to  make  any 
comment  on  the  evidence  of  the  witnesses  I  have  called.  I  ought 
to  say  nothing  to  prejudice  them.  There  are  two  reasons  why. 
In  the  first  place,  civil  proceedings,  I  understand,  are  pending  ; 
and,  in  the  second  place,  these  persons  are,  if  my  learned  friend's 
suggestions  are  well  founded,  actually  in  peril  of  being  charged 
with  the  serious  offence  of  perjury.  Therefore  I  purposely,  and, 
I  hope,  with  your  approbation,  abstain  from  saying  anything 
as  to  what  the  position  of  these  witnesses  may  hereafter  be  or 
what  the  value  of  their  evidence  was.  It  is  impossible  for  me  to 
say  more  than  I  have  done.  I  have  only  this  to  add.  I  have 
been  no  party  to  the  opening  of  this  grave.  I  am  not  at  all  for 
one  moment  advised  to  express  my  disapprobation  as  to  its 
opening — I  have  no  right  to — but  the  opening  of  the  grave  after 
the  cross-examination  of  my  various  witnesses  had  concluded 
was  a  voluntary  action  on  the  part  of  my  learned  friend  the 
counsel  for  the  defence.  It  is  true  you  (the  magistrate)  approved 
of  it,  and,  if  I  might  say  so  personally,  I  should  have  thought  it 
was  a  wise  course  to  take  ;  perhaps  in  some  respects  regrettable 
it  was  not  taken  before.  But  I  do  sympathise  with  Mr.  Herbert 
Druce  on  his  resistance  to  that  grave  being  opened,  although  at 
the  same  time  I  feel  what  he  declined  to  do  under  the  menace  of 
prosecution  he  has  shown  a  wise  judgment  in  doing  under  what 
I  may  call  the  moral  pressure  of  public  opinion  ;  and  that  ought 
to  be  some  satisfaction  to  him  for  any  pain  that  he  might  have 
been  caused  in  the  matter.  That  is  all  I  can  rightly  say  with 
regard  to  the  course  of  this  prosecution.  My  learned  friend,  in  his 
opening  address,  referred  to  my  attitude  towards  this  case  as  one 
of  levity.  He  suggested  I  did  not  treat  the  case  seriously.  I  do 
not  know  that  the  state  of  mind  of  the  learned  counsel  for  the 
prosecution  is  very  material,  but  I  think  I  ought  to  say  this — it 
is  only  due  to  you,  Sir,  that  I  should — that  I  never  felt  a  graver 
sense  of  responsibility  in  any  case  than  that  which  I  have  felt  in 
this.  I  have  endeavoured  to  avoid  referring  to  any  matters 
which  would  give  pain  to  Mr.  Herbert  Druce,  or  to  introduce 
collateral  matters  which  were  irrelevant  to  the  true  issue.  A 
great  mass  of  evidence  was  submitted  to  me  to  be  called  in  this 
case,  but  I  only  selected  that  evidence  which  in  my  judgment 
was  material  to  the  issue,  and  I  do  certainly  resent  and  regret 
that  my  learned  friend,  who  is  really  as  old  a  member  of  the  Bar 


as  myself,  should  have  thought  fit  to  suggest  that  I  had  not 
thoroughly  realised  the  seriousness  of  this  case.  I  can  say  no  more, 
Sir,  than  that  I  have  to — I  hope  you  will  not  take  it  as  imper- 
tinence—I have  to  thank  you  for  the  most  fair  and  impartial 
discrimination  which  you  have  shown  in  the  conduct  of  this 
case,  and  the  facilities  you  have  afforded  to  both  sides  for  the 
purpose  of  eliciting  the  truth. 

Mr.  Plowden. — Mr.  Atherley-Jones,  if  it  is  any  relief  to 
your  feelings— and  I  can  quite  understand  that  you  should 
rather  invite  some  expression  from  the  Bench — I  am  happy  to 
assure  you  I  have  not  from  first  to  last  in  the  conduct  of  the 
case  ever  observed  any  deviation  in  the  slightest  degree  from 
that  constant  honour  and  integrity  one  would  expect  from 
yourself.  Still  less  have  I  seen  any  reason  that  those  who 
instruct  you  have  not  thoroughly  and  sincerely  believed,  rightly 
or  wrongly,  in  the  truthfulness  of  their  own  case.  With  regard 
to  the  course  you  have  now  decided  to  take,  I  agree  that  it  is 
not  only  a  wise  and  a  proper  course,  but,  if  you  will  permit  me  to 
say  so,  the  only  course  which  was  open  to  a  counsel  of  your 
experience  in  the  circumstances.  In  view  of  the  silent,  but  not 
less  eloquent,  voice  that  has  come  to  us  from  the  open  grave,  it 
would  not  be  possible,  in  my  opinion,  to  continue  this  prosecution 
without  serious  risk  to  the  highest  interests  of  justice.  I  will 
go  further.  Even  apart  from  this  new  and  dramatic  feature 
which  has  been  imported  into  this  case,  I  think  you  must  have 
felt,  Mr.  Jones,  at  the  close  of  the  last  hearing,  after  the 
collapse  of  your  most  important  witness,  and  after  your  long, 
able,  but  fruitless  cross-examination  of  the  nurse,  Miss  Bayly, 
that  the  foundations  of  your  case  were  even  then  slipping  under 
your  feet.  This  inquiry  may  have  taken  some  time,  but  I  do  not 
think  any  impartial  person  will  say  that  the  time  has  been  wasted. 
The  bubble  which  has  floated  for  so  long  and  mischievously 
out  of  reach  has  been  effectually  pricked  at  last.  No  one  can 
now  doubt  that  Thomas  Charles  Druce  existed  in  fact  ;  that  he 
died  in  his  own  home  in  the  midst  of  his  family,  and  that  he 
was  buried  in  due  course  in  the  family  vault  in  the  cemetery  at 
Highgate.  His  existence  stands  out  as  clear,  as  distinct,  and  as 
undeniable  as  that  of  any  human  being  that  ever  lived.  How 
the  myth  ever  arose  that  confused  him  and  the  fifth  Duke 
of  Portland  as  the  same  personality  it  would  be  idle  to  speculate. 
Sufficient  to  say  that  this  case  is  an  illustration  of  that  love  of 
the  marvellous  which  is  so  deeply  ingrained  in  human  nature, 
and  is  likely  to  be  remembered  in  legal  annals  as  affording  one 
more  striking  proof  of  the  unfathomable  depths  of  human 
credulity.  The  summons  is  dismissed,  if  that  is  the  right  form 
to  take.  It  amounts  to  the  same  thing  whether  you  withdraw 


your  summons  or  I  dismiss  it.  I  have  only  one  final  word  to 
say.  Mr.  Herbert  Druce  leaves  this  Court  with  his  character 
for  truthfulness  absolutely  and  conclusively  vindicated.  I  think 
that  he  also  deserves  the  acknowledgment  of  the  Court  for 
having  consented  to  take  a  course  which,  though  it  may  have 
materially  served  his  defence,  was  nevertheless  in  the  highest 
degree  distasteful — and  I  think  rightly  and  naturally  so — to  his 
feelings  as  a  son  and  as  a  Christian  gentleman.  Addressing  Mr. 
Herbert  Druce  personally,  Mr.  Plowden  added: — "The  Court 
thanks  you  for  having  consented  in  the  interest  of  justice  to  the 
desecration  of  your  father's  grave.  You  are  now  discharged." 

EXERCISE  No.  11. 

The  trial  of  Franz  Von  Veltheim,  49,  agent,  upon  the  indict- 
ment charging  him  with  having  on  June  11,  1907,  caused  to  be 
received  by  Mr.  Solomon  Barnato  Joel  a  letter  demanding 
property  from  him  with  menaces  and  without  any  reasonable 
or  probable  cause,  was  resumed  and  concluded. 

Mr.  C.  F.  Gill,  K.C.,  Sir  Charles  Mathews,  and  Mr.  Bodkin 
prosecuted  ;  Mr.  Vachell,  K.C.,  and  Mr.  Artemus  Jones  appeared 
for  the  defence. 


Mr.  Justice  Phillimore,  in  summing  up  the  case  to  the  jury, 
said  that,  as  the  learned  counsel  who  had  defended  the  prisoner 
with  his  well-known  and  accustomed  skill  had  told  the  jury 
yesterday,  the  charge  was  a  very  serious  one,  and  it  was  part  of 
the  honoured  law  of  England  that  a  man  should  not  be  found 
guilty  unless  the  charge  was  brought  home  to.him  to  the  reason- 
able satisfaction  of  the  jury.  The  charge  against  the  prisoner 
was  one  of  sending  a  letter  on  June  11,  1907,.  to  Mr.  Joel 
demanding  from  him  with  menace  £16,000  without  any  reason- 
able or  probable  cause  for  that  demand.  There  were  three 
questions  for  the  consideration  of  the  jury — (1)  Did  the  prisoner 
send  the  letter  (as  to  that  there  was  no  doubt)  ;  (2)  did  the 
letter  demand  money  with  menaces — serious  threats  ;  and  (3) 
had  the  prisoner  any  reasonable  or  probable  cause  for  demand- 
ing the  money  ?  They  had  heard  the  letter  read  more  than 
once,  and  he  should  read  it  to  them  again,  with  such  explana- 
tions as  the  prisoner  had  offered  and  such  comments  as  counsel 


for  the  prosecution  had  made  upon  it.  The  letter,  it  was  said, 
was  part  of  a  plan  and  the  most  important  part  of  it.  It  was 
posted  from  Odessa.  The  prisoner  never  was  at  Odessa,  but 
was  residing  at  Antwerp.  The  prisoner  told  them — they  had 
only  his  word  for  it,  but  he  did  not  see  why  they  should  not 
accept  it — that  he  was  going  to  Odessa,  but  something  pre- 
vented him,  and  that  he  dashed  off  the  letter  in  ten  minutes  at 
Budapest.  The  letter  was  followed  not  long  afterwards  by  a 
duplicate  sent  from  St.  Petersburg,  where  again  the  prisoner 
never  was.  The  prisoner  explained  that  he  caused  it  to  be 
posted  at  St.  Petersburg  by  the  same  man  who  had  posted  the 
other  for  him  at  Odessa.  Subsequently,  in  September,  a  letter 
was  received  from  Mr.  Bumiller  stating  that  Mr.  Von  Veltheim 
had  handed  him  a  bill  for  £16,000  and  asking  where  he  was  to 
present  it.  Mr.  Bumiller  was  asked  to  call  at  Mr.  Joel's  office, 
and  he  then  presented  the  bill  of  exchange.  Either  Mr.  Bumiller 
did  not  know  or,  if  he  knew,  declined  to  say  where  the  prisoner 
was.  It  was  only  by  following  him  back  to  Antwerp  and 
dogging  his  steps  that  the  prosecution  eventually  succeeded  in 
tracing  the  prisoner,  first  to  an  hotel  at  Antwerp,  and  eventually 
to  Paris.  The  prisoner's  explanation  of  how  he  came  to  write 
the  Odessa  letter  after  an  interval  of  nearly  nine  years  was  that 
he  was  thinking  of  going  to  America  to  reside,  and  he  wished 
to  settle  up  all  business  in  Europe  before  he  went,  and  he  had 
also  wished  Mr.  Joel's  anger  to  cool  down.  His  Lordship  pro- 
ceeded to  refer  to  the  writing  of  the  "  Kismet "  letters  by  the 
prisoner  to  Mr.  Joel  and  his  brother,  Mr.  Woolf  Joel,  in  1898, 
at  Johannesburg,  as  being  part  of  the  history  of  the  case  which 
was  material  for  their  consideration.  If  the  jury  had  never 
heard  from  the  prisoner  that  they  were  written  not  exactly  as 
a  bad  joke,  but  without  any  serious  intention,  they  would 
appear — taking  them  at  their  face  value — to  be  just  black- 
mailing letters  demanding  large  sums  of  money  with  threats  of 
a  most  serious  character.  The  writer  in  the  first  letter  described 
himself  as  a  desperate  man  at  the  last  stage  of  financial  de- 
pression, who  had  such  a  feeling  of  honour — or  sham  honour — 
that  he  would  rather  die  than  live  a  disgraced  man,  and  was 
ready  to  die,  but  proposed,  rather  than  death,  to  extract,  at  the 
point  of  the  sword  or  the  muzzle  of  the  pistol,  a  large  sum  of 
money  from  Mr.  Solomon  Joel,  who,  he  considered,  could  well 
afford  it.  He  was  ready  to  kill  Mr.  Joel  and  himself  too  if  his 
demands  were  not  complied  with.  The  sum  demanded  was 
£12,000.  It  was  true  that  in  some  respects  the  circumstances 
did  appear  as  if  they  were  taken  out  of  a  melodramatic  novel, 
but,  on  the  other  hand,  in  some  respects  they  exhibited  clever- 
ness, so  as  to  prey  on  the  nerves  of  the  receiver.  The  letters  as 


they  went  on  acquired  a  new  tone.  They  praised  the  spirit  of 
Solomon  Joel,  and  suggested  that  if  he  was  a  venturesome 
speculator  he  might  profit  by  a  loan,  not  a  gift,  of  £12,000  to 
"Kismet."  The  letter  contained  the  phrase  that  the  "business 
spells  politics."  Those  letters  continued,  addressed  first  to 
Solomon  B.  Joel,  then  to  the  Joel  Brothers,  then  to  Woolf  Joel. 
The  last  two  took  a  new  line.  One  of  them  said  that  "  Kismet " 
had  come  into  money  and  would  trouble  him  no  longer,  and  the 
prisoner  now  said  that  was  for  the  recipients  to  show  the  police 
to  enable  them  to  drop  the  case.  The  other  letter  was  practi- 
cally a  begging  letter,  and  it  was  signed  "Baron  Von  Veltheim." 
On  March  14,  1898,  the  prisoner  went  to  the  office  of  Messrs. 
Barnato  Bros,  at  Johannesburg,  where  Mr.  Woolf  Joel  and  Mr. 
Strange,  his  manager,  were.  Somehow  or  other  an  altercation 
arose  about  money  matters — how  certain  money  should  be  given 
— and  the  result  was  the  death  of  Mr.  Woolf  Joel,  who  had 
three  bullets  in  him.  The  prisoner,  who  said  that  he  fired  in 
self-defence,  was  tried  and  acquitted  by  a  Transvaal  jury  and 
then  deported  by  the  Transvaal  Government  as  an  undesirable 
alien  who  had  sent  threatening  letters.  The  prisoner's  explana- 
tion of  the  "Kismet"  letters  at  his  trial  was  that  they  were 
never  intended  as  real  threats,  but  that  they  were  written  for  a 
male  friend  who  was  in  want  of  money,  on  the  basis  of  some 
American  novel,  but  that  he  himself  had  not  wanted  money. 
In  regard  to  his  deportation,  the  prisoner  suggested  that  the 
Transvaal  Government  thought  they  had  got  on  the  track  of  a 
conspiracy  to  overthrow  them,  and  that  this  killing  was  a 
quarrel  between  conspirators.  It  "might  be  that  the  Transvaal 
Government  thought  there  were  persons  behind  Von  Veltheim 
trying  to  squeeze  Woolf  Joel  to  provide  revolutionary  funds 
and  that  the  Transvaal  Government  were  really  trying  to  find 
out  who  were  conspiring  against  Woolf  Joel.  He  asked  the 
jury  what  would  be  the  feelings  of  Solomon  Joel  when  he 
received  from  the  man  who  killed  his  brother  nine  years  ago, 
suddenly  and  unexpectedly,  a  letter  which  spoke  of  an  "  un- 
settled account."  The  learned  Judge  read  the  statements  made 
by  the  prisoner  when  arrested  in  Paris  in  which  he  characterised 
the  charge  as  a  ridiculous  one,  and  stated  that  he  had  received 
counsel's  opinion  that  the  letter  could  not  be  construed  as  a 
demand  with  menaces,  and  also  stated  that  it  was  an  attempt  to 
make  out  that  the  Odessa  letter  was  a  continuation  of  some 
crazy  letters  he  had  written  in  Johannesburg.  The  prisoner 
also  stated  to  the  police  that  Mr.  Woolf  Joel  had  offered  him 
£50,000  to  remove  Mr.  Kruger  and  that  he  had  refused,  and 
that  Mr.  Joel  knew  that  he  (the  prisoner)  could  have  gone  to 
the  Boer  Government  and  got  a  million  for  his  information. 


The  answer  of  the  prisoner  was  that  the  "  unsettled  account " 
mentioned  in  the  letter  meant  the  £12,000  which  Mr.  Woolf 
Joel  promised  him  and  which,  with  the  interest  from  the  date 
of  the  promise — 1898 — to  the  present  time,  brought  the  sum  to 
the  £16,000  represented  by  the  bill  of  exchange  ;  that  the 
expression  "  purposely  delayed  "  meant  that  he  had  intended  to 
sue  Mr.  S.  Joel,  and  that  "a  purely  financial  settlement"  con- 
veyed that  it  was  a  settlement  without  any  row  in  Court.  His 
"  grievances "  meant  the  attempt  to  assassinate  him  in  South 
Africa.  "Kegardless  of  consequences"  meant  that  he  had 
refused  to  betray  people  to  the  Boer  Government.  How  the 
prisoner  could  have  expected  to  have  any  cause  for  action 
against  Mr.  S.  Joel  he  (the  Judge)  failed  to  see,  or  why  Mr. 
S.  Joel  should  prefer  to  pay  £16,000  down  rather  than  risk  an 
action  in  the  English  Courts  of  Justice  again  he  failed  to  see. 
In  regard  to  the  prisoner's  explanation  of  how  he  became 
acquainted  with  Mr.  Barnato  through  the  introduction  of  a 
South  American  diplomatist,  it  was  curious  that  now  Mr. 
Barnato  and  Mr.  Kruger  and  the  South  African  Republic  were 
dead  the  diplomatist — as  the  prisoner  alleged — was  squeamish 
about  his  name  being  mentioned.  The  learned  Judge,  dealing 
also  with  the  prisoner's  evidence,  pointed  out  that  Mr.  Barnato, 
Mr.  Woolf  Joel,  and  Miss  Caldecott — whose  names  he  had 
mentioned — were  all  of  them  dead,  and  that  the  only  person 
whose  name  he  had  mentioned  who  was  now  alive  was  Mr. 
Strange.  Those  were  the  circumstances  which  the  prosecution 
said  bore  against  the  prisoner's  story.  It  was  further  asked 
why,  with  all  his  intimate  knowledge  of  South  Africa,  Mr. 
Barnato  should  have  been  so  struck — as  the  prisoner  alleged  he 
was — with  the  prisoners  suggestion  of  a  rival  Boer  candidate 
for  the  Presidency  against  Mr.  Kruger,  and  how  the  prisoner, 
who  had  never  then  been  in  South  Africa,  should  know  what  it 
would  cost  to  bribe  the  Boer  leaders.  The  prosecution  had  told 
them  that  Mr.  Barnato  had  no  intention  of  trying  to  upset  the 
Government  of  Mr.  Kruger,  with  whom  he  was  on  friendly 
terms,  and  had  taken  no  part  in  the  reform  movement  in  the 
Transvaal  or  in  the  Jameson  Raid. 


At  the  close  of  the  Judge's  summing  up  the  jury  retired,  and 
after  an  absence  of  twenty  minutes  they  returned  into  Court, 
finding  the  prisoner  Guilty. 


Mr.  Gill  said  the  City  Police  would  give  the  learned  Judge 
a  history  of  the  prisoner. 


Inspector  Pentin,  of  the  City  Police,  then  entered  the  witness- 
box,  and  read  the  following  statement  of  the  prisoner's  career  : — 
The  prisoner's  real  name  is  Karl  Friedrich  Moritz  Ludwig 
Kurtze,  born  December  4,  1857,  at  Hahausen,  in  the  district  of 
Gandersheim,  Brunswick,  and  his  father,  who  was  a  forester  at 
Hasselfelde,  died  there  in  1870,  leaving  the  prisoner  under  the 
guardianship  of  one  Ferdinand  Gustav  Thomas,  of  Hasselfelde, 
who  states  that  as  a  boy  the  prisoner  was  of  bad  behaviour,  and 
on  one  occasion  stole  his  father's  watch  and  some  spoons,  which 
he  sold  and  went  off  with  the  proceeds.  At  Easter,  1870,  Mr. 
Thomas  took  the  prisoner  to  a  school  at  Blankenburg,  whence 
he  had  to  remove  him  the  same  year  owing  to  his  mischievous 
tricks.  He  had  possessed  himself  of  a  schoolmasters'  pistol, 
which  went  off  in  his  pocket  and  marked  his  face  with  powder. 
The  prisoner  was  then  taken  to  an  orphanage  at  Brunswick, 
where  he  remained  till  April,  1872,  when  Mr.  Thomas  handed 
him  over  to  the  captain  of  a  steamship  at  Bremerhaven,  as  he 
wanted  to  be  a  sailor.  The  prisoner  left  that  ship  in  the 
autumn  of  1872  and  joined  a  German  sailing  ship,  from  which 
he  deserted  and  joined  an  English  ship,  in  which  he  came  to 
London,  when  he  communicated  with  his  guardian  in  the  name 
of  Louis  Werder.  His  guardian  heard  nothing  more  of  him  till 
1879,  when  the  prisoner  again  wrote  to  him  from  London  in  the 
name  of  Werder.  It  is  supposed  that  he  had  been  employed  in 
various  ships  in  the  meantime,  but  there  is  nothing  definite  to 
show  that.  On  April  3,  1880,  the  prisoner  entered  the  German 
navy  as  a  sailor  at  Hamburg,  and  on  June  18,  1880,  he  was 
sworn  in  as  a  sailor  under  the  name  of  Kurtze  in  the  4th 
Company  Second  Sailor  Division  of  the  German  Army  at 
Wilhelmshaven,  where  he  deserted  on  September  1,  1880,  and 
then  was  suspected  of  stealing  a  gold  watch  and  chain  and  a 
gold  seal  with  the  family  crest  of  Von  Veltheim  thereon  from 
Captain  Wilhelm  Von  Veltheim,  who  was  serving  there.  The 
next  information  obtained  regarding  him  is  that,  having  left  a 
ship  named  the  Heilawarra,  of  Sydney,  in  which  he  served  as  a 
seaman  in  the  name  of  Kurtze,  he  served  in  the  same  name  and 
capacity  in  other  ships.  During  the  interval  between  one  of 
these  voyages  he  went  in  the  name  of  Oliver  Jackson,  and  stayed 
at  Neustadt,  Germany,  where  he  represented  himself  to  be  a 
British  naval  officer.  When  he  left  the  Oriana  at  Fremantle  on 
July  20,  1886,  he  proceeded  to  Perth,  Western  Australia, 
where  he  assumed  the  name  of  Von  Veltheim,  and  said  he  was 
the  son  of  Baron  Von  Veltheim. 

On  November  19,  1886,  he  married  a  lady  at  Perth,  and 
resided  with  her  at  Sydney  till  March,  1887,  when  he  left  and 
proceeded  to  Cape  Town.  His  wife  afterwards  left  Australia 


by  the  steamship  Sydney  for  England,  and  on  the  voyage  met  a 
gentleman  with  whom  she  became  acquainted.  On  arriving  in 
London  she  went  to  reside  at  Westmoreland  Eoad,  where  she 
was  joined  by  the  prisoner  in  1887,  and  they  lived  there 
together.  The  prisoner,  hearing  of  his  wife's  acquaintance 
with  the  gentleman  whom  she  met  on  the  voyage  from  Australia, 
began  to  attempt  to  blackmail  him,  alleging  undue  intimacy 
with  his  wife,  and  he  demanded  £2,000,  but  ultimately  agreed 
to  accept  £750  to  hush  the  matter  up.  The  prisoner  was 
warned  that  the  matter  would  be  placed  in  the  hands  of  the 
police  ;  notwithstanding  which  he  sent  threatening  letters  for 
some  time  afterwards.  In  1888  the  prisoner  went  to  America 
and  got  a  situation  at  New  Orleans  under  the  agent  for  the  West 
India  Pacific  Steamship  Company,  for  whom  he  afterwards  went 
as  agent  at  Santa  Marta,  Eepublic  of  Colombia,  where  he  also 
acted  as  agent  for  the  Santa  Marta  Railway  Company  and  the 
Anheuser-Busch  Brewing  Company.  In  1894  he  visited  Europe 
and  went  to  Hasselfelde,  where  he  was  recognised  as  Kurtze  by 
a  man,  whom  he  asked  not  to  betray  his  identity.  About 
September  he  advertised  in  the  Frankfurter  Zeitung  for  a  wife, 
and  his  advertisement  was  answered  by  a  lady  named  Paula 
Schiffer,  of  Dresden.  He  returned  to  Santa  Marta  in  October, 
1894,  and  was  afterwards  appointed  Consular  Agent  there  for 
the  United  States.  In  December,  1895,  he  left  Santa  Marta 
for  England,  and  he  was  reported  to  have  collected  $3,000 
(£600),  which  he  did  not  account  for,  belonging  to  the  Anheuser- 
Busch  Brewing  Company,  whose  agent  he  was,  and  to  have 
defrauded  his  other  employers  there.  He  arrived  in  London  on 
January  6,  1896,  with  his  wife,  with  whom  he  stayed  at  the 
Hotel  Metropole.  In  the  end  of  January  he  went  to  Germany, 
where  he  met  Miss  Paula  Schiffer,  with  whom  he  had  been  in 
communication  after  her  reply  to  his  advertisements  in  1894. 
He  asked  the  lady's  father's  permission  to  marry  her,  which 
was  refused,  and  he  then  arranged  with  her  that  they  should 
be  married  in  London,  and  obtained  from  her  the  sum  of  £500 
to  establish  a  business.  He  returned  to  England  to  make 
arrangements  for  his  marriage  with  Miss  Schiffer,  and  he  took 
rooms  in  Gower  Street  at  a  boarding  house.  Miss  Schiffer 
also  followed  to  London,  and  on  May  6,  1896,  the  prisoner 
married  her  at  the  district  registry  office  of  St.  Giles's, 
describing  himself  as  Karl  Ludwig  Von  Veltheim  (this  marriage 
was  subsequently  annulled  in  the  Divorce  Court  on  December 
1,  1902,  as  bigamous,  his  first  wife  being  alive).  The  prisoner 
and  Miss  Schiffer  went  to  Weston-super-Mare  and  Lynton  for 
the  honeymoon,  returning  to  London  in  July,  1896,  when  it 
was  arranged  that  the  prisoner  should  go  to  America  to  establish 
P.W.  O 


a  home  for  them  there.  Miss  Schiffer  gave  him  £1000  for 
the  purpose,  making  a  total  of  £1,500  which  he  had  obtained 
from  her.  She  then  returned  to  Germany.  On  July  11,  1896, 
the  prisoner  was  again  at  Gower  Street,  where  he  met  a  Greek 
lady  named  Marie  Mavrogordato,  who  was  well  connected,  and 
said  to  be  well  off.  She  had  come  to  London  to  bid  farewell  to 
her  only  brother,  who  was  dying  in  hospital  from  an  accident, 
and  the  prisoner  became  on  friendly  terms  with  her.  He  did  not 
go  to  America  as  he  had  previously  arranged  with  Miss  Schiffer, 
but  followed  her  to  Germany,  when  she,  finding  she  was  about  to 
become  a  mother,  pressed  him  to  take  her  to  America  ;  but  he 
refused,  unless  she  gave  him  the  other  part  of  her  fortune.  This 
she  declined  to  do  ;  and  she  states  he  then  showed  himself  in 
his  true  colours  and  afterwards  gave  her  a  paper  saying  she 
was  free  to  do  as  she  liked  with  her  person  and  property. 
He  returned  to  Gower  Street  in  January,  1897,  resumed 
acquaintance  with  Miss  Mavrogordato,  and,  in  order  to  possess 
himself  of  her  wealth,  married  her  at  the  Kensington  Registry 
Office  on  February  13,  1897,  and  obtained  £300  from  her.  She 
afterwards  found  he  was  a  married  man.  He  absconded  and 
went  to  reside  at  an  hotel  in  the  East  End  under  the  name  of 
"Captain  Vincent,"  and  she  instituted  proceedings  to  annul  the 
marriage,  in  which  she  was  successful. 

On  April  17,  1897,  the  prisoner  proceeded  by  the  steamship 
Ionic  to  Cape  Town  in  the  name  of  F.  L.  Kurt,  in  which  name 
he  joined  the  Cape  Police  at  Kirnberley  on  July  21,  1887.  His 
history  came  to  the  notice  of  the  authorities  by  the  publicity 
given  in  connection  with  the  erroneous  identification  by  his 
real  wife  of  the  dead  body  of  a  sailor  found  in  the  Thames,  and 
he  was  called  upon  to  resign  from  the  Cape  Police  in  December, 
1897.  In  February,  1898,  he  began  to  attempt  to  blackmail 
the  Joel  brothers,  with  the  result  that  he  killed  Mr.  Woolf  Joel, 
for  whose  murder  he  was  tried  and  acquitted  at  Johannesburg 
in  1898.  After  his  acquittal  he  was  re-arrested  on  the  charge 
of  blackmail  arid  expelled  from  the  Transvaal  on  the  ground 
that  he  was  a  public  danger,  the  case  of  blackmail  being  post- 
poned sine  die.  He  was  sent  to  Delagoa  Bay,  and  while  there 
he  wrote  to  Miss  Schiffer,  the  lady  he  had  duped  in  1896,  asking 
her  to  send  him  £200.  On  December  2,  1898,  he  returned  to  the 
Transvaal  and  was  arrested  and  subsequently  sentenced  to 
four  months'  imprisonment  for  breach  of  the  expulsion  order. 
He  was  re-deported  to  Lorenzo  Marques,  where  he  was  arrested 
as  a  vagabond,  and  on  June  9,  1899,  a  passage  was  taken  for 
him  to  London  at  the  expense  of  the  Transvaal  Government, 
but  he  left  the  ship  at  Cape  Town  and  had  the  balance  of  his 
passage  money  (Cape  Town  to  London)  returned  to  him.  On 


September  25,  1899,  he  again  returned  to  the  Transvaal,  and 
was  re-arrested  by  the  Boer  Government  for  breach  of  the 
expulsion  order  and  was  eventually  sent  to  Pretoria  Gaol, 
where  he  was  found  a  prisoner  of  the  Boer  Government  when 
the  British  Army  took  possession  of  that  town  on  June  5,  1900. 
As  he  was  a  prisoner  of  the  Boers,  the  British  military 
authorities  saw  no  reason  to  detain  him,  and  deported  him  to 
England,  where  he  arrived  in  October,  1900.  At  the  end  of 
1900  he  went  to  Capri,  near  Naples,  and  in  1901  and  1902  he 
was  staying  at  Trieste,  where  he  pretended  that  he  was  the 
only  survivor  of  a  number  of  men  who  knew  where  the  late 
President  Kruger  had  buried  treasure  of  the  value  of  about 
£5,000,000,  and  on  the  pretence  that  he  could  obtain  it  he  raised 
capital  for  which  he  gave  bills  of  exchange  amounting  to 
500,000  kronen.  In  April,  1903,  he  was  staying  at  the  Strand 
Hotel,  Nervi,  near  Naples,  where  he  met  a  married  lady  and 
went  with  her  to  Geneva,  and,  as  the  result,  her  husband 
instituted  divorce  proceedings  against  her.  He  again  went  to 
Capri  and  made  the  acquaintance  of  a  married  lady  named 
Hulse,  who  was  possessed  of  means  and  property,  and  was 
living  apart  from  her  husband.  He  proceeded  with  this  lady 
to  America  and  went  to  reside  at  Sioux  Falls,  South  Dakota, 
where  Mrs.  Hulse  obtained  a  divorce  from  her  husband,  and  the 
prisoner  then  married  her  in  the  name  of  Baron  Von  Veltheim 
on  March  1,  1904,  at  Yanktown,  South  Dakota.  They  returned 
to  Capri,  and  both  were  arrested  there  on  a  charge  of  bigamy 
on  the  complaint  of  the  lady's  husband.  They  were  released 
pending  inquiries,  and  returned  to  America,  where  the  prisoner 
eventually  deserted  Mrs.  Hulse  and  their  child,  and  it  appears 
that  he  afterwards  tried  to  raise  money  on  property  which  she 
possessed  at  Capri. 

In  June,  1905,  the  prisoner  left  New  York  for  Europe,  and 
on  the  voyage  met  a  young  American  lady,  who  states  that  he 
followed  her  to  Paris  and  eventually  persuaded  her  to  marry 
him  secretly  at  St.  Cloud,  but  she  afterwards  found  that  the 
marriage  was  a  mock  one  and  that  the  prisoner  had  obtained  a 
friend  of  his  to  officiate  as  priest.  As  a  result  of  this  mock 
marriage  the  lady  was  confined  of  a  child  in  April,  1906,  in  a 
nursing  home  in  London.  She  has  now  returned  to  her  friends 
in  America.  In  August,  1905,  the  prisoner  went  to  Neustadt, 
Germany,  where  he  made  the  acquaintance  of  the  children  of  a 
widow  named  Mathis,  whom  he  had  met  about  20  years 
previously  at  the  same  place  when  he  was  passing  under  the 
name  of  "Oliver  Jackson."  Having  ascertained  that  Mrs. 
Mathis  was  possessed  of  considerable  means  left  by  her  late 
husband,  he  went  and  saw  her  at  Offenburg  and  renewed  the 


acquaintance  with  her,  representing  to  her  that  he  was  part 
owner  of  a  large  mining  business  in  America,  and  induced  her 
to  give  him  16,000  marks  (£800)  on  the  pretence  of  investing  it 
in  his  mining  property.  In  November,  1905,  he  received 
further  sums  from  Mrs.  Mathis,  making  a  total  of  56,000  marks 
(£2,800)  to  be  invested  for  her,  and  he  said  that  he  had  personally 
invested  390,000  marks  (£19,500)  in  the  undertakings.  He  also 
promised  to  marry  this  lady,  and  gave  her  an  engagement  ring. 
During  1906  he  was  staying  for  a  considerable  time  at  Basel, 
and  was  said  to  have  been  spending  money  freely — probably 
the  proceeds  of  what  he  had  obtained  from  Mrs.  Mathis.  In 
November,  1906,  the  relatives  of  Mrs.  Mathis,  having  become 
aware  of  her  having  entrusted  him  with  so  much  money,  applied 
for  the  repayment  of  it,  but,  instead  of  complying  with  the 
request,  he  asked  for  more  and  even  drew  bills  of  exchange  on 
her,  saying  that,  if  she  did  not  accept  them,  they  would  both 
be  ruined.  In  February,  1907,  he  went  to  Antwerp  and  stayed 
there,  except  for  some  short  absences,  until  about  August  13, 
when  he  went  to  Paris,  where  he  was  arrested  for  the  present 
offence  on  September  19.  He  was  then  living  with  another 
woman,  who  was  passing  as  Mme.  Von  Veltheirn.  This  lady  is  a 
daughter  of  a  respectable  gentleman  at  Antwerp.  On  November 
11,  1907,  Mrs.  Mathis,  having  heard  of  the  prisoner's  arrest  and 
other  particulars  regarding  him,  committed  suicide  by  drowning, 
in  despair  at  the  loss  of  her  own  and  her  children's  fortune  with 
which  she  had  entrusted  him.  His  extradition  had  been  applied 
for  by  the  German  Government  for  the  fraud  on  Mrs.  Mathis. 
No  information  had  been  obtained  by  the  police  to  show  that 
the  prisoner  has  done  any  real  business  or  work  since  he  was 
discharged  from  the  Cape  Police  in  1897,  although  he  has  been 
receiving  and  spending  considerable  sums  of  money.  When  he 
was  arrested  in  Paris  he  had  about  £60  in  his  possession.  This 
was  spent  in  Paris  with  the  exception  of  about  £5  which  he  had 
when  extradited  to  this  country.  Otherwise  he  appears  to  have 
no  means,  and,  when  awaiting  extradition  from  Paris,  he  applied 
to  a  newspaper  to  -assist  him  in  his  defence. 


The  prisoner  several  times  interrupted  the  reading  of  the 
inspector's  statement,  saying  it  was  a  tissue  of  lies.  He  asserted 
that,  when  he  was  re-arrested  by  the  Transvaal  Government, 
he  had  gone  there  under  a  safe  conduct  from  the  President,  and 
he  was  told  on  his  arrest  that  the  first  prisoner  of  war  was  to 
be  himself.  He  offered  the  British  Government  Mr.  Kruger, 
and  said  he  could  get  him  with  25  men,  but  Colonel  Maxse  told 
him  the  Government  did  not  want  him.  No  woman  could  say 


he  had  ever  deceived  her.  If  he  had  ever  had  anything  to  do 
with  them,  they  were  perfectly  well  aware  of  the  facts.  He  had 
always  told  them  the  facts,  and  he  had  never  had  any  money 
from  any  of  them,  except  from  two  who  gave  it  him  for  certain 
purposes.  He  went  to  New  Orleans  and  worked  on  a  wharf  to 
maintain  the  lady  with  him.  He  eventually  became  manager, 
and  had  22  great  ocean  steamships  under  his  control.  From 
there  he  was  sent  to  organise  a  new  place,  with  absolute  powers. 
There  were  no  banks  open,  and  he  was  accustomed  to  carry 
$30,000  (£6,000)  or  $40,000  (£8,000)  about  with  him  in  his 
trunk.  He  worked  there  for  five  years,  and  the  business  was 
still  in  existence  and  flourishing. 

Mr.  Justice  Phillimore  said  some  of  the  statements  read  by 
the  inspector  had  been  taken  down  in  a  way  they  were  not 
accustomed  to  in  England.  He  supposed,  as  to  some  of 
the  matters,  the  prosecution  had  personally  satisfied  them- 
selves ? 

Mr.  Gill  said  they  had  satisfied  themselves  by  a  mass  of 
documents  and  numerous  certificates  of  the  truth  of  the  state- 

Inspector  Pentin  said  a  great  deal  of  the  information  was 
based  on  reports  received  from  the  police  of  various  countries, 
from  whom  they  had  made  inquiries. 

The  prisoner,  being  asked  if  he  had  anything  to  say  why 
sentence  should  not  be  passed  upon  him,  said  the  record  of  his 
alleged  history  was  an  absolute  tissue  of  falsehoods.  He  had 
never  married  any  lady  except  one  in  1886,  at  Perth,  Western 
Australia.  The  girl  wanted  him  to  take  her  away  and  they 
went  through  a  sham  marriage  at  a  registry  :  he  meant  to  be 
honourable  and  marry  her  properly  later.  He  went  as  far  as 
Zanzibar  to  chase  Stanley  (the  explorer)  out  of  the  country,  but 
when  he  got  to  Zanzibar  Stanley  had  left.  Subsequently  he 
went  to  New  Orleans,  as  he  had  stated,  and  got  work  and 
prospered,  and  afterwards  proceeded  to  South  America  to 
establish  a  new  business.  There  he  met  the  friend — the 
Governor  of  a  State — whose  name  he  had  declined  to  mention 
and  who  later  on  in  London  introduced  him  to  Mr.  Barney 
Barnato.  Everything  he  had  said  about  the  Transvaal  plot 
was  perfectly  true.  He  had  to  cover  people,  and  he  would  cover 
them  now,  although  he  had  been  found  guilty.  In  the  main 
points,  he  had  told  all  the  truth.  He  did  not  intend  those 
wretched  "  Kismet "  letters  to  be  taken  seriously.  He  was  not 
such  a  fool  as  to  think  that  such  letters  would  produce  money. 
His  conscience  was  clear  on  that  point.  Mr.  Barnato  was  not 
the  principal  man  in  the  scheme  in  which  he  had  asked  his 
assistance,  but  he  was  one  of  a  number  of  them  interested  in  it. 


He  went  to  Mr.  Woolf  Joel  and  begged  his  pardon  for  the 
"Kismet"  letters,  and  Mr.  Joel  gave  him  his  pardon.  Why 
should  he — a  great  millionaire— meet  him  three  or  four  times 
and  treat  him  like  a  gentleman  and  ask  him  to  deceive  the 
police— as  the  letters  showed — if  there  was  no  business  arrange- 
ment between  them  ?  Mr.  Joel  only  wanted  to  be  a  sleeping 
partner.  Why  was  not  Mr.  Strange  called  there  to  prove  that  ? 
He  (the  prisoner)  was  tried  for  the  murder  of  Mr.  Woolf  Joel 
and  acquitted.  Thank  God,  it  was  not  a  British  jury  then.  He 
meant  no  reflection  on  the  present  jury,  but  the  others  were 
men  in  a  different  station  of  life,  who  did  not  measure  up 
everything  by  pounds,  shillings,  and  pence.  They  knew  he  was 
innocent,  and  acquitted  him.  Why  was  he  cheered  as  he  was 
when  he  came  out  of  gaol  ?  Because  everybody  knew  he  was 
innocent ;  and  not  only  that,  but  that  he  had  risked  his  life 
rather  than  betray  the  names  of  those  in  the  plot  to  the  Boer 
Government.  There  had  been  an  attempt  to  assassinate  him,  who 
would  not  hurt  a  fly  or  touch  anybody,  or  deceive  any  woman. 
He  repeated  that  he  had  never  got  money  from  women,  and  that 
the  story  of  the  mock  marriage  and  the  sham  priest  was  an 
invention.  He  had  no  idea  of  threatening  Mr.  Joel  when  he 
wrote  the  letters.  He  was  not  whining  for  mercy.  If  he  had 
played  the  game  and  lost  he  would  not  have  minded.  He  had 
not  played  that  sort  of  game.  The  "Kismet"  letters  were 
silly— stupid,  but  he  did  not  think  they  would  be  brought  up 
again  against  him. 


Mr.  Justice  Phillimore,  addressing  the  prisoner,  said: — "I 
have  heard  your  story  and  I  have  heard  the  account  of  your  life. 
I  am  not  going  to  dwell  upon  that.  I  address  you  in  the  name 
you  have  chosen  to  take  yourself — Von  Veltheim — although  I 
know  it  is  not  one  that  you  have  a  legal  light  to  and  that  by 
taking  it  you  bring  dishonour  upon  an  honourable  family.  I 
treat  you  in  the  name  you  have  chosen — Franz  Von  Veltheim — 
and  as  such  I  sentence  you.  I  do  not  take  into  account  all  your 
immoralities  as  bearing  on  your  punishment,  or  things  in  your 
early  life  which,  God  knows,  may  long  ago  have  been  wiped  out. 
I  do  not  take  this  into  account.  What  I  have  to  consider  is, 
first,  that  you  have  been  found  guilty  of  one  of  the  most  serious 
crimes  known  to  the  law,  and,  secondly,  I  must  not  only  punish 
but  prevent,  and  prevention  in  this  case  must  mean  to  prevent 
you  from  getting  at  the  man  you  have  threatened  and  to  enable 
that  man  and  society  generally  to  live  in  peace  from  you.  I 
only  look  upon  your  past  life  as  showing  that  you  are  a  man 
who  can  be  desperate  and  can  do  many  forms  of  wickedness  in 


order  to  get  money  and  are  capable  even  of  carrying  out  such 
threats  as  were  contained  in  these  letters.  The  sentence  of  the 
Court  is  that  you  be  kept  in  penal  servitude  for  20  years. 

The  prisoner,  who  seemed  somewhat  stunned  on  hearing  the 
sentence,  was  then  removed  by  the  attendant  warders. 

EXERCISE  No.  12. 


At  Bow  Street,  yesterday,  before  Sir  A.  de  Rutzen,  who  again 
sat  specially  in  the  Second  Court,  Mary  Robinson,  alias  Mary 
Ann  Robinson,  was  again  brought  up  on  remand  charged  with 
having  committed  perjury  in  her  evidence  in  the  Druce  case  at 
the  Marylebone  and  Clerkenwell  Police  Courts. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews  (instructed  by  Mr.  Sims,  of  the  Treasury) 
appeared  on  behalf  of  the  Director  of  Public  Prosecutions.  The 
prisoner  was  not  legally  represented.  Mr.  Paddison,  of  the 
firm  of  Messrs.  Paddison,  Trevor,  and  De  La  Chapelle,  solicitors, 
watched  on  behalf  of  Mr.  Coburn  and  Mr.  George  Hollaniby 


Chief  Inspector  Dew  was  recalled  for  the  purpose  of  producing 
further  documents  which  he  found  at  the  prisoner's  flat  in 
Sisters  Avenue,  Clapham.  The  first  put  in  were  an  extract  in 
circular  form  from  the  Evening  News  of  October  27,  1906  ;  and 
two  deposit  receipts  from  the  London  and  Westminster  Bank 
in  the  prisoner's  name,  one  for  £50  deposited  on  November 
18,  1907,  and  the  other  for  £17  on  December  31,  1907.  There 
was  a  letter  to  the  prisoner  from  Mr.  Coburn,  dated  November 
30,  1907,  from  65  London  Wall,  which  at  that  time  were  the 
offices  of  the  Druce  Company  (Limited).  The  letter  was  read 
as  follows  : — 

"  Dear  Miss  Robinson, — I  will  thank  you  to  be  in  attendance 
at  the  Clerkenwell  Police  Court  on  Monday  next,  December  2, 
at  10.30  sharp,  when  it  is  intended  that  your  depositions  should 
be  read  over  to  you  and  signed.  Permit  me  to  say  that  the 
evidence  which  you  have  furnished  has  been  much  appreciated 
by  every  one  having  the  interest  of  this  cause  at  heart  ;  and 
Mr.  Druce  and  myself  feel  ourselves  much  obliged  to  you  for 


submitting  yourself  to  the  unpleasant  ordeal  of  the  drastic 
cross-examination  to  which  you  were  subjected.  Yours  truly, 
THOS.  K.  V.  COBURN." 

The  next  letter  put  in  was  from  Messrs.  Oswald,  Hanson  & 
Smith,  the  prisoner's  solicitors,  dated  January  14,  1908,  and 
ran  : — 

"  44  Hammersmith  Road,  London,  W. 

"  Dear  Madam, — Re  Druce, — We  have  heard  from  Mr.  Kimber 
that  he  will  be  glad  to  hear  from  you  regarding  the  brooch  and 
ring.  We  may  mention,  as  we  have  before  said,  we  see  no 
reason  why  these  articles  should  not  be  valued.  Please  let  us 
have  remittance  for  the  amount  due  to  us. 

"  Miss  Mary  Robinson." 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — At  any  time  have  you  yet  recovered 
the  ring  or  the  brooch  ? 

The  Witness.— I  have,  Sir  Charles. 

There  was  also  a  letter  from  Mr.  Kimber  as  follows  : — 

"  15  Walbrook,  E.C.,  Sept.  27,  1907. 

"Dear  Madam, — I  have  now  seen  the  agents  of  Messrs. 
Harper  &  Co.  in  London,  who,  I  find,  are  a  highly  respectable 
firm.  They  have  told  me  everything  that  has  taken  place.  It 
appears  the  way  in  which  young  Harper  became  acquainted 
with  the  Duke  of  Portland  was  this.  He  was  on  a  visit  to  this 
country  as  one  of  the  Australian  team  of  cricketers,  and  they 
all  went  down  to  Welbeck  to  see  a  famous  racehorse.  The 
duke  happened  to  be  at  home,  and  he  invited  them  all  to  lunch. 
This  appears  to  have  been  the  extent  of  his  acquaintance.  He 
says  he  never  saw  the  letters  you  had,  nor  the  diary ;  in  fact, 
he  did  not  know  you  had  the  letters.  I  got  from  the  agents 
here  the  substance  of  the  report  of  the  police  to  this  country, 
which  is  of  a  scandalous  and  libellous  nature,  and  the  result, 
evidently,  of  communications  from  other  persons  clearly 
animated  with  a  deliberate  intention  of  injuring  you  and 
your  character  ;  but  I  have  warned  them  about  this,  and  they 
said  they  shall  not  think  of  acting  upon  the  suggestions  of  Mr. 
Harper,  who  is  evidently  very  angry  about  what  you  have  said 
about  him.  Chief  Inspector  Scott,  of  Scotland  Yard,  has  been 
here  this  morning,  and  says  they  cannot  give  me  a  copy  of  the 
report.  I  told  him  it  would  have  to  be  produced  on  subpoena  if 
necessary.  The  whole  thing  points  to  the  machinations  of 
some  evil-disposed  persons  who  are  quite  independent  and 
without  the  knowledge  of  either  the  police  or  Messrs.  Harper, 
and  these  persons  have  evidently  ascertained  your  whereabouts 
here,  and  they  are  manifestly  connected  wilh  the  private 


inquiry  agent  of  the  duke  ;  but  I  have  no  doubt  I  shall  be 
able  to  catch  them  tripping  before  long.  In  fact,  I  think  they 
have  already  seriously  compromised  the  duke's  case  and 
strengthened  Mr.  Druce. — Yours,  faithfully,  EDMUND  KIMBER. 

"  Miss  Kobinson,  37  Marcus  Street,  St.  Ann's  Hill,  Wands- 
worth,  S.W." 


The  next  was  a  letter  from  Messrs.  Oswald,  Hanson  &  Smith 
to  the  prisoner,  dated  January  2,  1908,  enclosing  their  bill  of 
costs.  Some  of  the  items  were  read  as  follows  : — 

October  28,  1907. — Attending  Miss  Kobinson  on  her  calling, 
when  in  accordance  with  her  request  we  handed  her  the  diary 
and  took  receipt  therefor,  and  Miss  Robinson  promised  to 
return  the  diary  when  she  had  finished  with  it,  so  that  we 
might  keep  same  in  safe  custody. 

November  1. — Attending  Miss  Kobinson  on  her  calling,  when 
she  informed  us  she  had  had  the  misfortune  to  lose  her  diary, 
and  we  expressed  our  profound  sympathy  for  her,  strongly 
advising  her  to  lose  no  time  in  proceeding  to  Scotland  Yard  to 
report  her  loss  in  detail.  The  Hammersmith  police  authorities 
were  also  informed. 

December  20. — Attending  Miss  Robinson  on  her  calling, 
discussing  this  matter  with  her,  when  she  instructed  us  to 
write  Mr.  Edmund  Kimber  with  respect  to  her  witness  fees. 

December  21. — Writing  Mr.  Kimber  accordingly. 

December  27. — Having  received  letter  from  Mr.  Kimber, 
writing  him  acknowledging  receipt,  and  stating  we  had  sent 
our  client  a  copy  of  his  communication,  and  we  further  stated 
we  hoped  the  remittances  would  be  received  regularly  in  the 
future.  Writing  Miss  Robinson  enclosing  copy  of  the  letter  we 
had  received  from  Mr.  Kimber. 

December  31. — Attending  Miss  Robinson  on  her  calling,  when 
she  handed  us  a  box,  locked  and  sealed,  containing  certain 
valuables  belonging  to  her,  and  we  promised  to  keep  same 
for  her  in  a  secure  place  and  gave  her  a  receipt  for  same. 
Discussing  and  advising  generally.  Writing  Mr.  Kimber  for 
one  week's  expenses  owing  to  Miss  Robinson  in  accordance 
with  her  instructions. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — I  will  just  take  it  from  you,  inspector, 
the  grave  of  Mr.  Thomas  Charles  Druce  at  Highgate  was  opened 
on  December  30,  the  day  before  the  depositing  of  that  box 
which  is  said  to  contain  valuables  ? 

The  witness  said  that  that  was  so.  He  produced  the  box  in 
question — an  ordinary  small  tin  cash-box — which  he  explained 
was  handed  over  to  him  by  Messrs.  Oswald,  Hanson  &  Smith. 


He  opened  it  and  checked  the  contents  in  the  presence  of 
Mr.  Smith,  of  that  firm.  It  contained  some  articles  of  jewelry 
of  an  ordinary  character,  amongst  them  being  a  small  tin  box, 
containing  a  marquise  ring  and  a  brooch. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — Were  you  present  in  Court  when  the 
prisoner,  in  the  witness-box,  pointed  to  a  ring  on  her  finger  and 
took  a  brooch  from  her  dress,  saying  that  they  had  been  given 
to  her  by  the  fifth  Duke  of  Portland  ? 

The  Witness.— I  was. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — There  were  some  documents  in  the 
box,  including  one  that  appears  to  be  a  copy  of  a  cable 
addressed  to  George  Hollamby  Druce,  care  of  Reuter's :  — 
"£250  sailing  February  14.  Rinmtaka.  Very  bad  sailor. 
Require  lady  companion. — ROBINSON.  Remit  by  telegram 
immediately  through  Reuter's." 


Two  letters  were  next  put  in,  both  dated  March  8,  1907,  and 
addressed  to  the  prisoner  at  Teneriffe.  One,  signed  "  Thos. 
U.  V.  Coburn,"  ran  as  follows  : — 

"  Dear  Madam, — I  understand  that  Mr.  Druce  is  writing 
you  by  the  sarile  mail  so  I  need  not  enter  into  any  particulars 
beyond  saying  that  every  one  interested  in  the  matter  is  looking 
forward  to  your  arrival,  arid  that  I  count  very  much  on  your 
assistance,  which  I  feel  sure  you  will  be  able  to  render  me  in 
tracing  the  early  history  in  connexion  with  the  late  duke.  I 
had  written  you  on  January  11  last  to  New  Zealand,  and  in 
case  you  started  before  that  letter  arrived  I  now  enclose 
copy  of  same.  I  heard  from  Mr.  Harper  with  copy  of  the 
diary  entries  and  your  statement,  which  I  obtained  from  his 
London  agents  on  payment  of  his  and  their  costs." 

The  other  letter  was  from  Mr.  George  H.  Druce,  as  follows  : — 

"  Dear  Mrs.  Robinson, — I  have  been  looking  each  mail  for  a 
letter  from  you,  but  thought  that  perhaps  you  would  not 
write  until  you  where  leaving  New  Zealand  for  London 
and  if  you  wrote  I  should  get  the  letter  in  an  other  two 
weeks  time.  I  cabled  to  you  at  Montvido  of  course  knowing 
that  our  wittnesses  were  interf eared  with  hire  in  england. 
I  thought  perhaps  that  they  may  hav  got  wind  of  the 
time  and  route  you  are  coming  to  England  by.  I  said  in 
my  cable  to  you  that  I  should  meet  the  Boat  at  Plymouth  and 
if  there  has  been  any  person  sent  to  intersept  the  Boat  at  any 
port  they  have  not  been  sent  by  hus.  Of  course  I  reeconise  the 
power  of  the  other  side.  So,  Dear  Mrs.  Robinson,  all  being 
well  I  will  meet  you  at  Plymouth  when  the  Boat  arrives  and 


present  my  card.  You  will  probibly  know  me  by  the  photo- 
graph. I  hope  you  are  having  a  good  passage  across.  I  must 
now  conclude  as  T  am  very  bussy  to-day. — Hoping  this  will  find 
you  and  your  friend  quite  well,  From  yours  most  respectfully, 

[The  mistakes  in  the  spelling  appeal1  in  the  typewritten  copy 
of  the  original  letter.] 

The  witness  continued  that  he  also  found  in  the  box  a  copy- 
book, wrapped  in  brown  paper.  It  purported  to  be  either  a 
diary  or  a  copy  of  a  diary  of  events  which  happened  in  the 
years  1861,  1862,  and  1868-70. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — I  see  that  the  events  of  the  earlier 
years  appear  to  have  been  recorded  last.  The  whole  of  it  is  in 
the  prisoner's  handwriting.  On  looking  at  the  entries,  inspector, 
would  you  say,  speaking  generally,  that  they  appear  to  have 
been  made  at  about  the  same  time? 

The  witness. — Yes.  They  appear  to  have  been  more  or  less 
continuously  written. 


Sir  Charles  Mathews. — After  the  prisoner  was  in  custody,  on 
or  about  January  28  in  this  year,  did  you  receive  an  intimation 
that  she  desired  to  see  you  for  the  purpose  of  making  a  state- 
ment?— I  did,  Sir  Charles;  on  January  27  I  received  the 
information.  On  the  28th  did  you  attend  at  Holloway  Prison 
and  there  see  the  prisoner  ? — I  did,  with  Sergeant  AVilliams. 
And  did  she  then  make  a  voluntary  statement  to  you  which  you 
took  down  in  writing  as  she  made  it? — It  was  taken  down  and 
she  signed  each  sheet.  She  did  not  conclude  it  on  the  28th,  on 
the  score  of  fatigue? — Yes,  and  there  was  not  sufficient  time. 
It  was  resumed  on  January  29,  30,  31,  and  again  on  February  5. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews  remarked  that  he  proposed  to  read  some 
parts  of  the  statement.  He  did  not  intend  to  give  the  whole  of 
it,  because  in  parts  there  were  reflections  of  a  grave  character 
on  third  persons  not  before  the  Court,  and  he  did  not  consider 
it  fair  to  those  persons  that  this  statement  should  be  made 
public  in  their  absence.  He  proposed  to  read  those  parts  of  it 
which  told  how  it  was  that  the  prisoner  came  to  be  a  witness 
in  the  case,  and  some  of  the  incidents  which  occurred  in  this 
country  after  her  arrival. 

The  statement  as  read  by  Sir  Charles  Mathews  was  as 
follows:  — 

"Holloway  Prison,  January  28,  1908,  Mary  Ann  Eobinson, 
prisoner  on  remand  at  the  above  prison,  says  : — I  desire  to 
make  a  voluntary  statement  to  you  as  to  how  I  came  to  this 
country.  No  promise  has  been  held  out  to  me  to  induce  me  to 


make  any  statement.  I  want  to  say  that  no  promise  has  been 
held  out  to  me  by  the  police,  and  you  can  make  any  use  you  like 
of  this  statement.  I  want  to  say  how  it  was  I  left  New  Zealand. 
In  May,  or  about  that  time,  1906,  I  was  living  at  Falsgrave 
Street,  Christchurch  (N.Z.),  with  my  daughter  alone.  I  bought 
an  Australian  newspaper  by  chance,  and  in  this  newspaper  I 
saw  an  account,  but  not  what  I  call  a  proper  account,  of  the 
Druce  case.  In  this  paper  it  says  that  the  fifth  Duke  of 
Portland  was  a  wizard,  but  I  knew  this  was  not  correct,  because 
I  knew  him  when  I  was  at  Worksop.  I  felt  interested,  and  I 
thought  I  would  write  to  the  person  to  whom  one  had  to  write, 
telling  him  what  I  knew  about  the  case.  The  address  was  at 
Melbourne,  and  the  name  was  Druce,  but  I  do  not  remember 
the  exact  address.  In  my  letter  I  said  the  duke  was  not  a 
wizard,  but  a  gentleman ;  they  were  labouring  under  a  mistake. 
I  told  him  I  knew  the  duke  and  had  seen  him  many  times. 
Mind,  I  never  meant  anything  bad." 


"  Three  weeks  or  a  month  afterwards  a  man  called  at  my  house 
and  said  his  name  was  Druce.  He  referred  to  the  matter  I  had 
written  about.  He  stood  at  the  door  talking  to  me,  and  he 
said,  '  Cannot  I  come  in  ?  I  have  an  offer  to  make  to  you.'  I 
invited  him  in.  He  said  that  the  Druce  case  was  in  want  of 
funds  ;  that  he  had  made  some  inquiries  about  me,  and  I  was 
just  the  person  he  required.  He  said  he  had  heard  I  was  clever 
at  writing,  and  if  I  would  write  what  he  wished  and  do  as  I  was 
told,  I  should  receive  £4,000.  When  he  said  this  I  considered 
and  thought  it  must  be  something  very  important.  I  said, 
'  What  am  I  to  do  for  the  £4,000  ? '  He  told  me  he  wanted  a 
book  written  in  my  own  handwriting  of  the  history  of  all  I  knew 
about  the  duke  and  his  surroundings ;  to  make  it  as  attractive 
as  I  could,  so  that  they  could  raise  money  on  it  to  meet  their 
expenses.  The  expenses,  he  explained,  were  to  enable  the  firm 
in  favour  of  Druce  to  claim  the  dukedom  of  Portland.  The 
man  Druce  said — I  think  he  was  the  brother  of  Mr.  Druce  in 
London — that  he  claimed  to  be  the  grandson  of  the  fifth  Duke 
of  Portland.  He  also  told  me  that  his  father  came  out  to 
Australia  at  the  time  of  the  diggings,  that  he  had  £1,000  given 
him  by  the  duke  in  '65  to  enable  him  to  live  out  there.  I  asked 
him  what  Druce's  father  was,  and  he  replied,  '  A  perfect  gentle- 
man and  a  well-educated  man,  but  a  gold-digger.'  He  then 
asked  me  what  I  knew  about  the  duke.  I  told  him  I  had  stayed 
with  Mrs.  Pearce  at  Worksop,  but  did  not  say  who  she  was. 
I  told  him  I  had  seen  the  duke,  but  not  under  what  circum- 
stances. He  then  said  he  wanted  me  to  write  in  pamphlet  form 


all  I  could  say  or  invent  about  the  fifth  Duke  of  Portland.  I 
said,  '  I  am  not  going  to  expose  myself  to  everybody.'  He  said, 
*  Say  you  come  from  America.  We  have  another  person  coming 
from  there.  He  is  writing  to  say  so.  You  won't  be  alone  in 
writing.'  He  also  said  there  was  a  person  writing  or  had 
written  a  book,  and  she  had  received  £600  for  it.  I  do  not 
remember  whether  he  told  me  these  people's  names.  I  thought 
if  other  persons  were  doing  this,  I  might  have  a  show  as  well. 
At  any  rate,  the  temptation  was  too  strong  for  me,  so  I  promised 
I  would  write.  The  man  said  he  would  call  later  and  see  me,  but 
he  never  did.  He  may  have  said  something  more,  but  I  forget." 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — That  is  the  way  in  which  she  explained 
that  she  had  been  approached  ?  The  witness. — Yes,  Sir  Charles. 

The  statement  continued  : — "  Before  this  occurrence  I  had 
seen  a  few  scraps  in  the  newspapers  concerning  the  Druce  case. 
This  same  man  asked  me  if  I  knew  the  Baker  Street  Bazaar,  as 
he  said  the  Duke  of  Portland  was  the  owner.  I  told  him  I  had 
heard  some  flying  news  about  it,  but  I  was  at  Worksop.  He 
told  me  I  was  to  be  sure  to  say  I  came  from  America.  This  man 
who  called  on  me  was  aged  about  50  or  more.  He  had  no  grey 
hair  ;  5ft.  Tin.,  about  the  height  of  G.  H.  Druce,  and  very  like 
him  ;  he  was  clean  shaven,  except  a  moustache,  hair  fair.  He 
was  a  fair  man  with  blue  eyes  and  a  medium  build.  When  I 
saw  Druce  in  this  country  I  said  to  myself  '  The  man  who  called 
on  me  in  New  Zealand  must  have  been  his  brother.'  When  I 
saw  Druce  in  England  he  told  me  he  had  a  brother  in  Australia. 
When  the  man  had  left  my  daughter  asked  me  what  he  wanted. 
I  did  not  tell  her  much.  I  mentioned  about  the  £4,000,  and 
what  the  man  wanted  me  to  do  for  it.  Of  course  she  could  not 
help  me  much.  She  said,  '  Please  yourself.  It  is  worth  trying.'" 


"  I  then  wrote  on  sheets  of  paper  just  what  I  thought  would 
do  for  it.  About  the  beginning  of  November,  1906,  I  heard 
from  England,  but  before  this  I  had  finished  the  history  on 
paper  by  about  September,  and,  not  hearing  from  Australia,  I 
thought  they  had  made  a  fool  of  me.  Before  I  finished  my 
history  I  received  by  post  from  England  six  pamphlets,  two  at 
a  time,  one  called  '  Portland  Millions '  and  the  other  '  The  Druce 
Case.'  Some  of  these  I  used  for  waste  paper  and  some  I  saved. 
I  did  not  read  them  ;  I  was  disgusted  when  I  read  '  Portland 
Millions'  outside.  Miss  O'Neil  read  them.  I  got  the  pieces  of 
paper  on  which  I  had  written  the  history  and  transferred  it  into 
an  old  diary  book.  I  came  across  it  amongst  a  lot  of  litter  I 
bought  as  odds  and  ends.  It  had  a  grey  linen  cover.  There 
was  a  date  inside,  but  I  forget  the  date.  When  I  transferred  it 


I  kept  the  sheets  of  paper  already  written  on.  The  contents  of 
this  diary  I  compiled  alone  at  the  request  of  the  man  from 
Australia,  as  I  thought  I  was  going  to  have  the  £4,000.  I  think 
it  was  at  the  end  of  October  or  November  that  I  heard  from 
England,  I  received  a  letter  and  two  pamphlets  from  London. 
It  was  from  the  offices  of  the  Druce  Company,  and  it  was  either 
from  Druce  or  Coburn.  I  think  it  must  have  been  from  Druce, 
because  I  knew  it  was  from  the  office.  I  cannot  remember  the 
contents.  Soon  after  I  received  another  letter  from  London,  and 
that  was  signed  Coburn.  He  told  me  to  take  the  letter  to  a 
solicitor  and  make  a  statement  to  him  as  to  what  I  knew,  and 
the  solicitor  was  to  send  it  on  to  him.  Mr.  Coburn  said  he 
would  pay  him  when  the  statement  was  received  for  any  trouble. 
Two  pamphlets  came  with  this  letter,  which  it  was  suggested  I 
should  circulate  amongst  my  friends.  I  went  to  Mr.  Harper, 
and  told  him  what  I  knew  about  the  duke.  I  also  told  him  I 
had  a  diary,  but  did  not  tell  him  what  the  man  from  Australia 
told  me  to  do.  I  received  letters  by  every  mail  from  Coburn  and 
Druce.  and  they  wanted  to  know  if  I  would  come  to  England 
and  bring  the  diary  with  me.  There  was  nothing  in  these 
letters  which  would  implicate  them  in  anything  ;  they  are  too 
artful.  I  wrote  saying  I  would  come  over.  After  this  Druce 
cabled  me  £250.  The  letters  and  cables  they  sent  to  me  first 
were  addressed  to  Mrs.  Robinson,  but  they  never  asked  me 
whether  I  was  Mrs.  or  Miss.  Before  this  I  had  a  letter  from 
Mr.  Coburn  asking  how  much  they  were  indebted  to  me  and  how 
much  I  should  require  before  leaving.  I  told  him  £250,  and  I 
told  him  I  was  going  to  bring  a  companion  with  me.  I  never 
told  him  she  was  my  daughter,  and  he  never  asked  me.  I  left 
in  February  last  with  my  daughter,  who  travelled  as  Miss 
O'Neil.  I  know  they  promised  to  meet  me  at  Plymouth.  On 
my  arrival  at  Plymouth  Mr.  Coburn  and  Mr.  Kimber  met  me 
and  my  daughter.  The  first  thing  Mr.  Kimber  asked  me  for 
was  my  diary.  I  said  the  captain  had  got  it.  Mr.  Kimber 
asked  the  captain  for  it,  but  he  would  not  give  it  to  him,  and  he 
(Mr.  Kimber)  kicked  up  a  regular  row.  Mr.  Kimber  had  four 
or  five  men  with  him,  but  Mr.  Coburn  did  not  stir  off  the  launch. 
I  then  went  to  the  captain,  and  he  at  once  gave  me  the  things, 
the  diary  and  various  other  little  articles.  We  stayed  that  night 
in  Plymouth.  I  told  Mr.  Kimber  that  I  had  lost  a  package  in 
which  were  some  letters.  Mr.  Kimber  said,  '  Stick  to  your  tale. 
Stick  to  your  tale.'  Mr.  Kimber  said,  'We  want  to  make  a 
sensation  ;  there  is  nothing  done  without  it.'  Mr.  Kimber  and 
Mr.  Coburn  had  a  long  talk  in  the  train  about  the  Druce  case. 
They  told  me  Mr.  Druce  would  be  the  Duke  of  Portland  very 
soon,  and  referred  to  him  as  '  His  Grace.'  In  the  train  Mr. 


Coburn  said  to  me,  '  You  will  get  your  £4,000  without  a  murmur, 
perhaps  £5,000,  if  you  stick  to  your  guns.'  As  soon  as  the 
captain  handed  me  the  diary  and  the  other  things  Mr.  Kimber 
took  possession  of  them.  I  have  never  had  my  diary  again 
from  Mr.  Kimber  except  for  three  days,  when  I  paid  Oswald, 
Hanson  &  Smith  £2  to  get  it  for  me.  I  asked  Mr.  Kimber 
twice  for  my  diary,  but  he  declined  to  give  it  to  me,  saying  it 
was  at  his  bankers." 

Sir  Charles  Mathews. — Then  follow  statements  referring  to 
people  outside  the  case.  On  January  29  there  is  a  further 
reference  to  the  diary.  The  statement  goes  on  : — 

"  I  had  a  conversation  with  Mr.  G.  H.  Druce.  I  do  not  think  on 
this  occasion  I  mentioned  anything  about  my  diary,  and  he  kept 
away  for  over  a  week.  Then  he  called  again,  and  I  think  he 
told  me  this  time  they  were  doing  well  with  the  diary  and  were 
receiving  plenty  of  money  on  it,  and  any  time  that  large  share- 
holders came  they  had  to  be  taken  to  Mr.  Kimber's  office  to  see 
the  diary." 


Sir  Charles  Mathews.— She  concludes  that  day's  statement  by 
saying  she  told  Mr.  G.  H.  Druce  of  the  visit  she  had  from  a 
man  name  Druce  in  New  Zealand.  "  He  said,  '  That  is  all 
right ;  that  is  perfectly  true.  I  know  all  about  it,'  having 
previously  said  he  had  had  a  brother  who  lived  out  there.  I 
asked  whether  he  was  the  younger  or  the  elder,  and  he  said, 
'  The  younger.'  I  think  he  said  his  name  was  William  and  that 
he  was  in  a  good  position,  that  he  travelled  about,  and  had  been 
in  New  Zealand  several  times  arid  to  the  Cape.  He  said  he  was 
apprenticed  to  a  safe  maker.  He  also  told  me  a  lot  of  nonsense." 
At  the  end  she  states,  "  My  maiden  name  was  Mary  Ann  Webb, 
and  I  am  the  daughter  of  James  Webb,  who  was  a  police- 
sergeant  for  many  years  at  Mortlake.  I  went  to  school  at  the 
National  Schools,  Mortlake,  and  was  married  in  Leeds  on 
March  17,  1863,  and  lived  there  for  a  time.  Then  we  went  to 
Nottinghamshire,  to  Worksop,  in  1869,  I  think.  My  husband 
worked  as  shepherd  for  a  time  for  the  Duke  of  Portland,  and  at 
other  places.  In  1874  or  1875  we  migrated  to  New  Zealand 
with  our  two  children.  We  went  to  Waimati,  and  my  husband 
died  there  in  August  many  years  ago.  After  that  I  went  with 
my  children  to  Christchurch  and  the  outskirts,  where  I  remained 
until  I  came  to  this  country." 


Sir  Charles  Mathews  observed  that  in  the  course  of  her  state- 
ment on  January  30  the  prisoner  referred  to  her  journal,  and 
she  went  on  to  say : — 


"Mr.  Coburn  asked  me  to  try  to  obtain  my  diary  from  Mr. 
Kimber  to  put  in  his  (Mr.  Coburn's)  locker,  and  also  for  any 
papers  I  had  had  given  me  by  Mr.  Kimber  or  any  other  papers 
which  had  anything  to  do  with  the  case.  I  asked  Mr.  Kimber 
for  my  diary,  arid  he  refused  to  give  it  to  me,  saying  it  was  at 
his  bankers.  Then  Mr.  Coburn  asked  me  for  any  other  papers. 
I  think  I  gave  him  a  few,  but  I  cannot  remember  what  they 
were.  I  think  some  of  them  were  little  jottings  I  made  myself 
as  to  information  given  to  me  by  other  people  which  I  had 
gathered  together.  I  think  I  gave  him  the  piece  of  paper  which 
I  had  written  in  New  Zealand  after  the  man  Druce  had  called 
011  me.  Mr.  Coburn  laughed  very  heartily  when  I  gave  him 
this,  and  said  they  had  made  a  lot  of  money  in  Australia  over 
this,  and  all  they  wanted  now  were  good  witnesses.  He  told 
me  they  would  have  to  depend  on  their  witnesses,  as  they  did 
not  intend  to  say  anything  themselves." 

Then  there  was  a  further  reference  to  the  diary,  which 
counsel  said  was  unimportant,  and  the  statement  went  on : — 

"The  next  time  I  think  M.  Balham  (?)  came,  and  wanted  to 
know  if  Mr.  Kimber  had  taken  my  diary  to  New  York  to  show 
this  man — (Sir  Charles  Mathews. — Obviously  referring  to  Robert 
Caldwell) — because  if  I  had  got  it  Mr.  Coburn  wanted  it,  so  as 
to  copy  it.  He  wanted  to  take  three  copies  of  it.  He  said  they 
had  had  a  cable  from  Mr.  Kimber,  who  was  still  in  America,  as 
to  whom  he  was  staying  with,  and  saying  that  he  would  be 
back  in  a  few  days,  but  that  the  man  was  not  coming  with  him, 
as  Mr.  Kimber  had  not  the  money  to  pay  him.  Mr.  Jenkins 
came  the  next  time,  and  told  me  Mr.  Coburn  was  going  to 
America  to  see  this  man  and  bring  him  back.  I  then  asked 
whom  this  man  was  that  they  were  going  to  bring  back,  and  he 
told  me  it  was  Caldwell." 

Sir  Charles  remarked  that  he  would  omit  certain  passages 
which  followed.  He  continued  reading : — 

"The  next  I  heard  was  that  Caldwell  and  his  solicitor  were 
leaving,  and  there  was  a  great  dinner  to  entertain  them,  I  think, 
at  Liverpool."  Further  on  the  statement  continued: — "  I  never 
did  see  Caldwell  in  my  life  until  I  saw  him  in  the  Police  Court 
at  Marylebone  when  I  went  to  swear  my  information.  Mr. 
Allen,  his  solicitor,  was  there  also.  That  was  also  the  first  time 
I  had  seen  Mrs.  Hamilton.  I  did  not  speak  to  her,  and  I  was 
not  introduced.  I  think  Druce  introduced  me  to  Caldwell, 
saying,  '  This  is  the  lady  who  has  come  from  New  Zealand,  and 
who  wrote  this  wonderful  diary  that  has  caused  so  much 
sensation  and  raised  so  much  money.'  Caldwell  said  he  hoped 
he  should  be  able  to  do  as  much  for  them  as  I  had  done,  and 


said  lie  would  bet  his  life  that  he  would  have  Herbert  Druce  in 
gaol.  Mr.  Allen  (Caldwell's  solicitor)  then  took  possession  of 
me,  and  I  must  say  I  never  enjoyed  any  one's  company  so  much 
as  his.  He  said,  '  I  hear  you  are  a  very  interesting  person,  but 
do  you  know  Scotland  Yard  ? '  I  said,  '  Well  I  cannot  say  that 
I  don't,  and  I  think  to  myself  if  I  don't  my  poor  old  father  did.' 
Mr.  Allen  said  that  his  idea  was  that  they  could  not  catch 
worms,  and  he  went  on  to  speak  in  praise  of  the  New  York 
police.  When  we  removed  to  Sisters  Avenue,  Clapham,  Mr. 
Kimber  did  not  send  his  clerk  with  the  money,  because  Druce 
would  not  give  him  the  cheques.  I  had  a  letter  from  Mr. 
Kimber  saying  that  Scotland  Yard  was  after  me,  and  that  1  was 
a  bad  character,  and  had  been  chased  out  of  New  Zealand  by 
the  police  there.  When  I  got  this  letter  I  thought  Mr.  Kimber 
was  drunk,  and  my  daughter  and  I  called  on  Mr.  Watt,  and 
showed  him  Mr.  Kimber's  letter.  He  said  it  rested  with  Mr. 
Kimber's  clerk,  and  they  should  not  come  to  my  house  again. 
After  this  Mr.  Crickmer  used  to  call  and  pay  me.  He  called  a 
few  times,  and  then  he  knocked  it  off.  After  that  Mr.  Druce  and 
his  son  (Lord  William)  used  to  call.  About  a  week  before  I 
went  to  Marylebone  to  swear  an  information  I  had  a  letter 
from  Mr.  Kimber  and  a  document,  typewritten,  about  some 
evidence  I  was  to  give.  I  did  not  like  this,  and  I  sent  it  to 
Messrs.  Smith  and  Hanson  and  Co.  They  told  me  not  to  swear 
to  anything  I  objected  to,  and  I  either  sent  it  back  or  gave  it  to 
Mr.  Watt.  I  called  on  Mr.  Watt  on  that  day.  Coburn  came 
after  this  and  said  he  wanted  me  to  go  to  Court  and  swear  about 
some  lead  in  the  coffin.  I  told  him  I  would  not  swear  it  for  any 
one,  as  I  knew  nothing  about  the  lead  in  the  coffin.  The  day 
after  this  Mr.  Allen  called  upon  me.  He  told  me  he  was  a 
detective.  I  said,  '  I  thought  you  were  a  solicitor.3  H^  said, 
'  So  I  am  in  America.'  He  asked  me  about  my  diary,  and  said 
he  should  like  to  get  hold  of  it.  He  called  on  me  several  times, 
and  asked  if  I  had  got  my  diary,  as  if  it  once  got  into  his  hands 
he  could  make  some  money  out  of  it  from  the  newspapers. 
Coburn,  Kimber,  Watt,  and  Druce  were  all  at  this  period  trying 
to  get  my  diary.  It  was  at  this  time  in  the  hands  of  Mr.  Smith, 
who  got  it  from  Mr.  Kimber,  so  that  I  could  read  it  over  before 
I  went  into  Court.  I  wanted  my  tale  in  the  witness-box  to 
appear  a  little  feasible,  even  although  it  was  all  lies.  The  diary 
remained  with  Mr.  Smith  about  a  fortnight.  Then  I  went  to 
Smith  and  got  it.  He  did  not  let  any  one  know  I  had  done  so. 
The  first  thing  I  did  on  getting  it  was  to  read  it  to  see  that  it 
was  all  there." 




"We  bought  a  couple  of  exercise  books.  It  took  me  three 
days  to  copy  it.  I  did  not  make  the  copy  exactly  as  the 
original  diary.  I  did  not  copy  some  of  the  pages  as  I  did  not 
have  time.  I  did  not  leave  out  much.  The  reason  I  hurried 
so  was  that  I  wanted  the  original  out  of  the  house.  I  also  had 
a  note  from  Mr.  Crickmer  offering  to  come  with  me  to  deposit 
the  diary  in  a  safe  or  he  would  take  it  himself.  As  I  was 
determined  that  Mr.  Coburn  should  not  have  the  diary  I  deter- 
mined to  take  it  to  Smith.  The  story  I  have  already  told  as  to 
the  loss  of  the  book,  diary,  etc.,  is  a  true  one.  I  never  actually 
told  any  of  them  that  I  had  manufactured  the  contents  of  my 
diary,  but  I  think  that  they  knew  it  from  what  they  said  and 
the  manner  they  treated  me.  They  were  always  telling  me  I 
should  be  run  in  or  poisoned.  I  was  not  questioned  by  any  one 
as  to  how  I  knew  what  I  was  going  to  swear.  They  took  it  all 
for  granted.  When  Mr.  Kimber  called  on  me  the  day  after  I 
had  been  to  Hanson  and  Smith  he  said,  '  We  shall  have  to  draw 
out  a  rough  agreement  as  to  your  future  allowance,'  and  Mr. 
Kimber  dictated  as  to  what  I  should  write.  I  wrote  out  two. 
One  he  took  with  him  and  one  I  kept.  That  is  the  one  read  out 
in  Court  last  week.  Mr.  Kimber  told  me  it  was  no  good  as  it 
was  not  stamped.  All  I  care  to  say  about  the  Duke  of  Portland 
is  that  I  knew  him  and  he  knew  rue  well,  and  he  was  very  kind 
to  me  when  I  lived  at  Worksop  with  my  husband.  I  never  saw 
Mr.  Atherley  Jones  and  Mr.  Goodman  until  they  examined  me 
in  Court.  I  never  had  any  letters  from  the  Duke  of  Portland. 
But  I  did  have  two  from  Charles  Dickens.  These  were  missed 
in  transit  from  Wellington  on  the  boat." 


Continuing  her  statement  on  January  31,  the  prisoner  said:— 
"  I  remember  when  the  man  Druce  first  called  on  me  in  New 
Zealand  he  said  he  would  give  me  £25  as  soon  as  I  made  a  start 
on  the  diary,  but  I  never  did  so.  When  I  left  New  Zealand  to 
come  to  England  it  was  for  the  purpose  of  raising  money  on  my 
diary  or  to  raise  any  other  sensation.  But  T  never  came  to 
swear  falsely.  I  never  came  to  swear  that  T.  C.  Druce  was  the 
Duke  of  Portland — only  to  say  what  I  heard  of  him.  When 
the  man  called  on  me  he  said,  *  Say,  T.  C.  Druce,  of  the  Baker 
Street  Bazaar,  was  the  same  person  as  the  fifth  Duke  of 
Portland.'  I  could  not  do  this  in  the  diary  right  off,  and  so  I 
had  to  work  it  round,  because  if  I  had  put  it  in  at  first  that 
would  have  closed  the  seam  and  there  would  have  been  no  more 
to  say.  I  remember  my  aunt,  who  lived  at  Tunbridge  Wells, 


told  me  that  a  magistrate's  name  there  was  Druce,  and  I  thought 
that  this  name  would  fit  in  all  right.  She  was  an  aunt  by 
marriage,  I  think.  I  fixed  1861  and  1868  out  of  my  imagination. 
I  never  thought  I  should  have  to  swear  what  was  in  my  diary. 
No  one  said  anything  to  me  about  swearing  until  a  few  days 
before  I  attended  the  Marylebone  Police  Court.  With  regard 
to  copies  of  letters  found  at  my  flat  purporting  to  come  from 
the  Duke  of  Portland  and  from  Charles  Dickens,  those  from  the 
duke  were  written  for  my  amusement.  The  one  from  Dickens 
is  practically  a  copy  of  a  letter  received  by  me  from  him.  I  did 
know  Charles  Dickens.  I  first  saw  him  when  I  was  at  the  Home 
and  Colonial  [college].  One  of  the  girls  knew  him  and  took  me 
home  and  he  was  there.  When  I  was  at  Worksop  he  visited 
there,  and  I  went  and  saw  him.  He  remembered  me  when  I 
spoke  to  him.  I  have  visited  Worksop  since  coming  to  England. 
I  bought  some  of  the  picture  postcards  there  and  some  were 
given  to  me  by  Coburn  and  Hanson.  The  piece  of  paper  in 
Mr.  Kimber's  handwriting  was  given  to  me  by  Mr.  Kimber 
himself  when  he  called  at  Sisters  Avenue.  He  told  me  not  to 
let  any  one  see  them.  He  told  me  that  he  should  bring 
witnesses  to  prove  that  what  I  said  was  correct.  After  I  had 
been  to  Worksop  I  received  two  guides.  I  don't  know  who  sent 
them.  It  was  suggested  to  me  before  this  that  I  should  get  a 
guide  to  Worksop  to  assist  me  in  my  memory.  As  to  the  truth 
of  my  statement  no  question  was  ever  put  to  me.  The  first 
person  who  ever  questioned  me  was  Mr.  Avory.  All  Mr. 
Kimber  did  in  this  respect  was  to  ask  me  several  times  if  I 
wrote  the  diary  myself." 

Sir  Charles  Mathews  went  on  to  say  that  on  February  5  the 
prisoner  related  how,  after  she  was  in  custody  Mr.  Kimber 
called  to  see  her  at  Holloway  Prison.  Her  statement  went 
on : — "  The  last  time  I  told  him  I  should  plead  guilty  and  show 
the  lot  of  them  up.  He  said,  '  You  must  not  do  that.  If  you 
do  you  will  get  seven  years.'  Then  I  made  up  my  mind  I  would 
tell  the  police  all  about  all  I  knew.  My  father  was  a  policeman 
and  I  thought  I  would  rather  tell  the  police  than  any  one  else." 


Inspector  Eeed,  of  the  Thames  Police,  was  then  called.  He  said 
that  on  March  30  of  last  year  the  prisoner  saw  him  at  Wapping 
Station  and  complained  of  the  loss  of  a  number  of  original 
letters — three  from  the  Duke  of  Portland  and  seven  from  Charles 
Dickens — while  coming  from  New  Zealand  on  the  Bimutaka. 
She  alluded  to  Miss  O'Neil  as  her  cousin.  She  named  a 
passenger  whom  she  strongly  suspected  of  the  theft  and  wished 
to  give  him  into  custody.  The  witness  declined  to  take  any 


such  course  on  the  ground  that  there  was  no  evidence  whatever 
against  that  person.  She  described  her  trunk  as  thief  proof, 
specially  made  of  steel.  Witness  made  inquiries  on  board  the 
Rimutaka  and  found  that  there  was  no  corroboration  of  the 
prisoner's  story. 

Asked  if  she  would  like  to  ask  this  witness  any  question  the 
prisoner  replied,  "  No,  I  think  I  had  better  wait  a  bit." 

The  prisoner  was  again  remanded. 

Sir  Charles  Mathews  intimated  that  the  only  other  witness, 
except  those  coming  from  New  Zealand,  was  Mr.  Thacker,  who 
was  an  official  connected  with  Druce  (Limited). 

The  remand  was  fixed  for  next  Monday. 

EXERCISE  No.  13. 
("  The  Times,"  February  19,  1908.) 


At  West  London,  yesterday,  William  Tyler,  aged  42,  described 
as  a  stationer,  living  in  Holland  Road,  Kensington,  was  charged 
on  a  warrant,  before  Mr.  Garrett,  with  obtaining  a  cheque  for 
31s.  3d.  by  false  pretences  from  the  Rev.  Alfred  John  Pitkin, 
curate  in  charge  of  the  parish  of  Aldbourne,  Wiltshire,  on 
August  6,  1906. 

Mr.  Arthur  Gill,  who  appeared  to  prosecute  on  behalf  of  the 
Director  of  Public  Prosecutions,  made  a  long  opening  statement, 
from  which  it  appeared  that  the  accused  had  been  making  for 
some  time  the  most  extraordinary  efforts  to  secure  ordination  at 
the  hands  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  and  of  different 
Bishops  for  the  purpose  of  becoming  a  missionary  in  the 
Colonies.  In  dealing  with  the  charge  before  the  Court,  Mr.  Gill 
stated  that  in  July,  1906,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Pitkin  inserted  the 
following  advertisement  in  the  Guardian : — "  Locum  tenens 
wanted  for  a  month  ;  open,  bracing  country  ;  fine  church  ; 
bachelor  rooms,  attendance,  etc."  A  reply  was  received  from  a 
person  signing  himself  as  the  Rev.  E.  W.  T.  Greenshield,  and 
addressed  from  177  Holland  Road,  Kensington.  The  writer 
stated  that  he  was  at  home  on  a  holiday  from  Canada,  where  he 
was  a  missionary,  and  would  be  glad  to  do  some  work  during 
his  holiday.  After  some  correspondence,  the  applicant  expressed 
his  intention  of  going  down  to  Aldbourne  before  deciding  to 
take  duty,  and  on  Sunday,  August  5,  the  accused  arrived  at 


Aldbourne  and  represented  himself  as  the  Kev.  Mr.  Greenshield. 
He  gave  a  very  full  description  of  himself  to  Mr.  Pitkin,  stating 
that  he  was  ordained  by  the  Bishop  of  London,  and  that  he  was 
engaged  in  mission  work  in  Canada.  That  Sunday  he  took  part 
of  the  service  at  Aldbourne  and  in  the  evening  he  preached  the 
sermon,  leaving  the  next  morning  after  receiving  from  Mr. 
Pitkin  a  cheque  for  31s.  3d.,  being  a  guinea  fee  and  expenses. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  Mr.  Gill  observed,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Greenshield 
was  at  that  time  in  Canada,  and  the  accused  had  forged  his  name 
to  the  different  letters  which  he  had  written  to  Mr.  Pitkin,  and 
had  obtained  the  cheque  by  those  false  pretences.  During  his 
visit  to  Aldbourne  Tyler  wore  clerical  attire,  and  on  the  only 
subsequent  occasion  on  which  Mr.  Pitkin  saw  him — namely,  one 
Sunday  at  Reading  Railway  Station — he  was  similarly  attired. 
He  never  took  a  month's  duty  at  Aldbourne,  and  nothing  more 
was  heard  of  him  until  his  arrest.  There  would  be  a  further 
charge  against  the  accused,  continued  Mr.  Gill,  of  forging  and 
uttering  a  letter,  dated  December  5,  1907,  purporting  to  be 
written  by  the  Rev.  O.  W.  Taylor,  acting  commissary  to  the 
Bishop  of  Saskatchewan,  Canada.  The  accused's  real  name  was 
Jabez  William  Tyler,  he  was  born  in  1851,  and  his  mother's 
maiden  name  was  Redstone.  In  June,  1905,  he  made  an  attempt 
to  procure  ordination  at  the  hands  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury. He  was  then  occupying  three  rooms  in  Bridge  Road, 
Hammersmith,  and  he  carried  on  a  printing  business  there. 
For  the  purpose  of  procuring  his  ordination  he  wrote  a  letter  in 
the  name  of  the  Rev.  W.  G.  White,  acting  commissary  to  the 
Bishops  of  Moosonee  and  Qu'Appelle,  recommending  Mr.  Tyler 
as  a  person  suitable  for  ordination.  Before  that  date  an  appeal 
had  been  inserted  in  the  Record  by  one  of  those  Bishops  for  aid 
in  missionary  work,  and  in  reply  two  persons,  or  rather,  as  the 
prosecution  alleged,  one  person — namely,  Tyler,  using  the  two 
names  of  Tyler  and  Redstone,  had  applied  to  go  out  as  mission- 
aries. At  that  time  the  accused  was  taking  part  as  a  layman  in 
church  work  at  St.  Mark's  Mission  Church — a  mission  attached 
to  the  parish  church  of  Hammersmith.  The  colonial  Bishop 
considered  that  the  age  of  the  applicant  Redstone  was  a  bar  to 
his  usefulness  in  the  mission  field,  but  he  favoured  the  applica- 
tion of  Tyler.  The  latter,  thereupon,  with  the  aid  of  the  forged 
letter  purporting  to  come  from  Mr.  White,  applied  to  the  Arch- 
bishop for  ordination.  Correspondence  followed  between  the 
Archbishop's  chaplain  and  Tyler,  and  the  former  intimated  that 
the  Archbishop  required  to  be  satisfied  of  Mr.  Tyler's  fitness  for 
ordination.  Thereupon  another  forged  letter,  bearing  Mr. 
White's  name,  was  sent  to  the  Archbishop,  in  which  Mr.  White 
was  made  to  say  that  the  colonial  Bishop  was  quite  satisfied  of 


Mr.  Tyler's  fitness.  In  a  letter  which  Tyler  himself  wrote  to 
the  Archbishop  he  enclosed  a  letter  purporting  to  have  been 
written  by  the  Rev.  J.  Parry,  vicar  of  Hammersmith,  in  which 
the  writer  expressed  his  desire  that  he  (Tyler)  should  receive 
ordination.  That  letter,  though  it  bore  the  printed  heading  of 
Hammersmith  Vicarage,  was,  Mr.  Gill  pointed  out,  another 
forgery,  and  the  notepaper  had  evidently  been  stamped  with  the 
address  on  the  prisoner's  printing  machines.  From  further 
correspondence  between  the  Archbishop  and  Tyler  it  appeared 
that  the  latter  desired  to  be  ordained  for  the  Colonies  generally, 
and  not  for  any  particular  colonial  diocese,  and  after  some  demur, 
the  Archbishop  appeared  to  be  willing  to  comply  with  that 
desire.  Steps  were  taken  for  the  necessary  legal  formalities  to 
be  observed  in  the  case  of  an  ordination — these  being,  amongst 
others,  the  production  of  the  accused's  baptismal  certificate  and 
the  publication  of  the  si  quis — the  ceremony  at  which  the  appli- 
cant for  ordination  announces  in  the  church  of  his  parish  his 
forthcoming  ordination.  As  regards  the  baptismal  certificate, 
Tyler  produced  a  certificate,  purporting  to  be  signed  by  his 
brother,  showing  that  he  was  baptised  at  St.  Mary's,  South- 
ampton, in  December,  1863.  The  brother  would  be  called  to 
prove  that  he  never  signed  the  document  and  that  he  knew 
nothing  of  the  matter.  The  ordination  was  subsequently  post- 
poned by  reason  of  the  fact  that  the  formalities  could  not  be 
complied  with  in  proper  time.  Simultaneously  with  this  attempt, 
the  accused  was  endeavouring  to  be  ordained  by  the  Bishop  of 
Southwark,  letters  similar  to  those  which  had  been  received  by 
the  Archbishop  being  sent  to  the  Bishop  of  Southwark  and 
the  name  of  the  Rev.  W.  G.  White  being  used  in  the  same  way. 
Mr.  White's  letter,  however,  came  under  the  eye  of  Mr.  Fox,  of 
the  Church  Missionary  Society,  and  he,  knowing  Mr.  White's 
handwriting,  warned  the  Bishop's  chaplain  against  Tyler's  appli- 
cation. In  September  of  the  same  year  the  accused  applied  to 
the  Bishop  of  London  to  be  ordained,  and  after  some  corre- 
spondence he  was  admitted  to  retreat  at  Fulham  Palace  before 
ordination.  One  day  the  Rev.  W.  G.  Woolsey,  who  knew  some- 
thing of  the  accused's .  antecedents,  called  at  the  palace,  and, 
recognising  Tyler,  gave  certain  information  to  the  Bishop.  The 
Bishop  thereupon  wrote  a  letter  to  the  Rev.  J.  Parry,  vicar  of 
Hammersmith,  and  despatched  the  accused  himself  with  it. 
When  the  missive  reached  Mr.  Parry,  he  noticed  that,  while  the 
envelope  bore  the  Bishopric  arms,  the  handwriting  was  not  that 
of  the  Bishop,  and  he  communicated  with  his  lordship.  The 
accused  was  taxed  with  having  tampered  with  the  envelope,  and 
he  made  a  lame  explanation  to  the  effect  that  he  dropped  the 
original  envelope  in  the  mud  and  then  put  the  note  in  a  fresh 


one,  which  ho  went  Lack  to  the  palace  to  fetch.  There  could  be 
no  doubt,  said  Mr.  Gill,  that  he  broke  the  seal  for  the  purpose 
of  ascertaining  the  contents  of  the  letter.  As  a  result  of  the 
Bishop's  inquiries,  the  accused  was  refused  ordination,  and  he 
was  dismissed  from  the  retreat.  At  a  later  date — in  November 
last  year — the  accused,  in  the  name  of  Tyler,  made  an  applica- 
tion to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  to  be  ordained  for  the 
Colonies,  and  in  support  of  his  application  he  sent  a  forged  letter- 
in  the  name  of  the  Rev.  H.  M.  Viret,  vicar,  "  in  charge  of  St. 
Mark's  Mission,  West  Kensington."  That  letter,  which  con- 
tained a  glowing  tribute  to  the  applicant,  and  the  writer,  after 
saying  "  our  only  fear  is  whether  it  is  not  a  mistake  to  let  him 
leave  this  country,"  observed  "  it  is  sad  that  so  many  obstacles 
should  be  put  in  the  way  of  one  so  earnest  and  with  a  true  voca- 
tion for  the  ministry."  In  addition  to  these  applications  by  the 
accused  in  the  name  of  Tyler,  there  would  be,  concluded  Mr.  Gill, 
several  cases  in  which,  using  the  name  of  Redstone,  he  had,  by 
means  of  similarly  forged  letters  of  recommendation,  etc.,  made 
the  utmost  endeavours  to  secure  ordination.  A  warrant  was 
obtained,  and  the  accused  was  arrested  by  Detective- sergeant 
Carlin  as  he  was  about  to  move  from  Holland  Road,  Kensington, 
where  he  carried  on  a  printing  and  stationer's  business. 

Evidence  was  given  by  the  Rev.  A.  J.  Pitkin,  curate  in  charge 
of  Aldbourne,  Wiltshire,  who  described  how,  in  answer  to  his 
advertisement  in  the  Guardian,  Tyler  came  down  to  Aldbourne 
and  took  the  prayers  at  the  morning  and  evening  services.  In 
the  evening  he  also  preached  the  sermon,  "an  excellent  sermon," 
added  Mr.  Pitkin,  smiling.  He  told  him  he  had  written  to  the 
Bishop  of  the  diocese  (Salisbury)  for  the  necessary  permission  to 
act  as  locum  tenens,  and  was  waiting  for  a  reply.  The  witness 
replied  that,  in  accordance  with  the  usual  custom,  he  should  write 
himself  to  the  Bishop.  He  gave  his  name  as  the  Rev.  E.  W.  T. 
Greenshield,  and  said  he  was  in  England  on  a  holiday  from 
Canada.  The  witness  gave  him  a  cheque  for  31s.  3d.,  which  was 
duly  paid  by  his  bank,  endorsed  "  E.  W.  T.  Greenshield.1'  He 
did  not  see  the  prisoner  again  except  once,  at  Reading  Station, 
one  Sunday. 

The  Rev.  Edgar  William  Tyler  Greenshield  stated  that  in 
July  and  August,  1906,  when  the  prisoner  was  at  Aldbourne,  he 
(the  witness)  was  in  the  Arctic  regions,  in  Baffin's  Land. 

Mr.  Gill. — Do  you  know  the  prisoner  ? 

The  witness. — Yes,  I  have  known  him  for  a  long  time. 

The  Rev.  William  Grenville  Boyd,  chaplain  to  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  since  October,  1905,  produced  the  correspondence 
which  took  place  between  the  accused  and  himself  in  regard  to 
the  former's  application  for  ordination, 


At  this  stage  the  magistrate  decided  to  adjourn  the  hearing 
for  a  week. 

The  prisoner. — Can  I  have  bail  ?  My  brother  and  the  Eev, 
Mr.  Greenshield,  my  nephew,  will  stand  bail. 

The  prisoner's  brother. — Your  Worship,  this  has  been  a  mania 
of  my  brother's  since  childhood. 

The  magistrate  refused  to  grant  bail. 



EXEKCISE  No.  14. 


LORD  CURZON  of  Kedleston,  as  president  of  the  Birmingham 
and  Midland  Institute,  delivered  an  address  in  the  Town  Hall, 
Birmingham,  last  night.  He  took  for  his  subject  "The  True 

In  the  course  of  his  address  Lord  Curzon  said  he  did  not 
suggest  that  there  was  a  false  Imperialism,  though  it  might  be 
that  strange  figures  sometimes  masqueraded  under  a  disguise 
to  which  they  could  lay  no  claim.  He  spoke  of  Empire  in  the 
first  place  because  he  was  a  convinced  and  unconquerable 
Imperialist,  who  by  the  accident  of  events  had  been  called  upon 
to  spend  the  whole  of  his  working  manhood  in  the  study  or  the 
service  of  Empire,  and  to  whom  it  had  come  to  be  a  secular 
religion,  embodying  the  most  sacred  duty  of  the  present  and 
the  brightest  hope  for  the  future.  His  second  reason  was  this, 
to  what  place  could  he  come  more  likely  to  receive  such  a 
message  with  an  enlightened  but  businesslike  comprehension 
than  here  ?  The  citizens  of  no  mean  city,  who  with  a  genius 
for  industrial  enterprise  and  a  local  patriotism  that  was  almost 
Hellenic  in  its  ardour  had  raised  their  town  to  a  unique  place 
among  the  great  manufacturing  capitals  not  merely  of  England, 
but  of  the  world,  they  had  for  the  past  20  years  identified 
themselves  with  the  politics  of  Empire.  They  had  nourished 
in  their  midst  and  had  again  and  again  sent  out  on  his  public 
mission  the  greatest  Imperial  statesman  of  this  generation — the 
man  of  whom,  whether  they  agreed  or  disagreed  with  his 
particular  views,  it  would  be  stark  prejudice  to  deny  that 
he  was  animated  by  a  noble  devotion  to  his  country  and  an 


impassioned  belief  in  its  destinies.  At  a  time  when  other  places 
and  districts  had  fallen  away  they  had  stood  fast  to  their 
convictions,  as  he  doubted  not  that  when  the  opportunity 
offered  they  would  do  again.  Where,  then,  could  he  better 
come  than  to  Birmingham  to  attempt  an  analysis  and  demonstra- 
tion of  the  faith  that  he  believed  to  be  equally  in  them  and  in 
him  ?  From  what  platform  so  suitable  as  that  Town  Hall, 
which  was  almost  the  central  altar  of  the  British  democracy, 
should  he  address  his  countrymen  in  the  endeavour  to  show 
them  what  it  was  that  Empire  meant,  in  what  sense  it  was  vital 
to  them,  why  it  ought  to  be  deep  in  their  hearts  and  fervent, 
though  never  boastful,  on  their  tongue  ?  (Cheers.) 

Proceeding  to  speak  of  the  history  or  growth  of  the  British 
Empire,  he  said  two  theories  had  been  much  in  vogue  to  explain 
the  facts.  The  first  was  the  idea  that  the  Empire  had  been 
built  up  by  a  succession  of  wicked  and  unscrupulous  men,  that 
Empire-makers  were,  as  a  rule,  Commandment  breakers,  and 
that  Proconsuls — a  class  to  which  he  was  so  fortunate  or  un- 
fortunate as  to  belong — represented  in  general  a  peculiarly 
dangerous  type.  Years  ago,  before  Mr.  John  Morley  had  had 
the  opportunity  of  showing  that  he  could  deal  with  a  great 
Empire  in  the  spirit  of  a  great  statesman,  lie  wrote  a  book  in 
which  he  spoke  of  Warren  Hastings  as  "the  great  criminal" 
and  the  foundation  of  British  dominion  in  India  as  "a  long 
train  of  intrigue  and  crime."  He  did  not  know  whether  with 
fuller  knowledge  Mr.  Morley  would  hold  these  views  now.  He 
hoped  not.  Anyhow,  he  believed  them  to  be  incapable  of 
historical  demonstration.  Some  Empire-makers  had  been  bad 
and  vicious  men.  By  no  stretch  of  imagination  could  Caesar 
or  Napoleon  possibly  be  described  as  good  men.  But  these 
characteristics  had  not  been  confined  to  the  making  of  Empires. 
If  they  looked  at  the  list  of  the  men  who  had  carved  out  the 
British  Empire,  they  would  find  that  moral  virtues,  a  spirit  of 
humanity,  and  an  almost  Puritanical  fervour  had  been  more 
common  qualities  than  those  of  the  filibusterer  or  the  bandit. 
In  India  in  particular,  after  a  careful  examination  of  the 
evidence,  he  held  that  no  substantial  case  could  be  made  out 
against  either  Clive  or  Warren  Hastings,  and  that  those  who 
had  added  most  to  our  Empire  there  had  been  men  with  clean 
hands  arid  a  high  moral  purpose.  The  second  theory,  which  he 
believed  to  be  equally  fallacious,  was  summed  up  in  the  famous 
phrase  that  the  British  Empire  was  acquired  in  a  fit  of  absence 
of  mind,  or  in  the  more  recent  apophthegm  that  what  was  won 
in  a  night  might  be  lost  in  a  day.  It  had  needed  many  days 
and  nights,  even  in  the  widest  acceptation  of  the  terms,  and  the' 
concentrated  purpose  of  many  minds  to  build  the  British 


Empire.  He  would  describe  the  Empire  as  the  result  not  of 
an  accident  or  a  series  of  accidents,  but  of  an  instinct—  that 
ineradicable  and  divinely  implanted  impulse  which  had  sent 
the  Englishman  forth  into  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth,  and 
made  him  there  the  parent  of  new  societies  and  the  architect  of 
unpremeditated  creations.  As  a  result  of  three  centuries  of 
such  effort  we  had  the  British  Empire  as  it  now  existed.  About 
one-fourth  of  the  world's  surface  and  more  than  one-fourth  of 
the  world's  inhabitants  were  included  in  the  British  Dominion. 
It  was  the  largest  Empire  that  now  existed  or  that  ever  had 
existed.  It  wras  also  unique  in  character  and  organisation.  But 
numbers  were  not  the  main  thing,  except  as  indicating  the  scale 
of  importance  and  responsibility  ;  the  test  was  not  size,  but  the 
work  done,  the  good  things  accomplished,  the  bad  things  wiped 
out,  the  general  impress  left  upon  the  well-being  of  mankind. 
Wherever  the  Empire  had  extended  its  borders,  there  misery 
and  oppression,  anarchy  and  destitution,  superstition  and  bigotry 
had  tended  to  disappear,  and  had  been  replaced  by  peace,  justice, 
prosperity,  humanity,  and  freedom  of  thought,  speech,  and 
action.  There  also  had  sprung,  what  he  believed  to  be  unique 
in  the  history  of  Empires,  a  passion  of  loyalty  and  enthusiasm 
which  made  the  heart  of  the  remotest  British  citizen  thrill  at 
the  thought  of  the  destiny  which  he  shared,  and  caused  him  to 
revere  a  particular  piece  of  coloured  bunting  as  the  symbol  of 
all  that  was  noblest  in  his  own  nature  and  of  best  import  for 
the  good  of  the  world.  When  Home  was  threatened  by  the 
barbarians  she  called  to  her  standard  her  scattered  legions  from 
far  and  near,  and  they  frequently  rebelled  and  mutinied  on  the 
way.  But  there  never  rallied  to  her  aid  the  offspring  of  her 
own  loins,  as  Australia  and  Canada  poured  their  volunteer 
manhood  into  South  Africa. 

Great  Britain,  however,  was  by  no  means  alone  in  her  career 
of  Empire.  She  started  earlier  upon  the  quest.  But  the 
example  had  found  faithful  followers,  and  expansion  seemed  to 
be  the  law  of  the  modern  vigorous  and  progressive  State.  How 
futile  it  was  to  decry  Empire,  or  to  protest  that  virtue  was  only 
found  or  was  more  readily  found  in  small  communities,  when 
they  observed  that  other  nations,  alike  the  most  autocratic  and 
the  most  republican,  were  following  a  similar  bent.  If  Russian 
expansion  was  capable  of  being  regarded  as  Caesarism,  and  of 
being  identified  with  the  Imperialism  of  material  rather  than 
moral  force,  what  was  to  be  said  of  the  Empire-making  phase 
upon  which  America,  the  most  democratic  and  hitherto  the 
least  Imperial  of  all  great  countries,  had  entered  ?  He  believed 
that  even  at  this  moment,  if  they  were  to  poll  the  whole  of  the 
United  States,  they  would  find  a  large  and  possibly  an  over- 


whelming  majority  opposed  to  any  concrete  policy  of  Imperial 
expansion.  But  circumstances  had  proved  too  strong  for  the 
Americans.  The  same  impulse  that  carried  them  early  in 
the  last  century  to  the  Rockies  and  the  Pacific,  now  that  the 
continent  had  filled  up,  was  driving  them  further  afield.  It  had 
compelled  them  to  lay  hands  upon  the  Sarnoan  and  Sandwich 
groups  in  the  open  Pacific,  to  assume  charge  of  Puertorico,  as 
they  would  ultimately  have  to  assume  charge  of  Cuba,  to  clutch 
at  the  Isthmus  of  Panama,  and  in  the  case  of  the  Philippines  to 
stretch  out  their  hands  even  to  the  shores  of  Asia.  Political 
parties  might  denounce,  and  the  more  thoughtful  Americans 
might  deplore,  the  expansion.  But  he  doubted  if  any  President, 
Democratic  or  Republican,  would  come  to  Congress  with  a 
Message  proposing  to  revoke  it.  If  then,  even  in  the  case  of  a 
nation  where  there  was  so  little  of  the  instinct  of  militarism  or 
aggrandisement  as  America,  the  country  was  found  heading 
straight  towards  an  Imperial  destiny,  was  not  the  conclusion 
inevitable  that  she  was  merely  obeying  a  general  law,  and  that 
Providence,  once  pronounced  to  be  on  the  side  of  the  big 
battalions,  was  now  found  to  be  on  the  side  of  the  big  nations  ? 
In  Europe  the  same  lesson  was  taught  by  Germany,  which  had 
repudiated  Bismarck's  warnings  against  over-seas  adventure  ; 
by  Italy,  which  had  barely  achieved  national  consolidation 
before  she  started  forth  upon  external  expansion ;  and  by 
France,  the  growth  of  whose  colonial  empire  was  only  second  to 
that  of  our  own.  Japan  had  been  swept  into  the  same  vortex 
and  could  not  resist  the  inexorable  compulsion.  If  the  doom 
of  small  nations  had  not  sounded,  at  least  the  day  of  great 
nations  seemed  to  have  dawned.  Amid  these  modern  Empires 
the  British  Empire  stood  distinguished  not  merely  by  its  earlier 
start  and  its  superior  extent,  but  also  by  its  unique  composition. 
It  was  not  a  mere  grouping  of  territorial  acquisitions  achieved 
by  the  valour  or  good  fortune  of  the  race.  It  was  not  a  cluster 
of  subordinate  units  grouped  in  deferential  pose  round  an 
Imperial  centre.  It  was  neither  a  military  Empire,  as  was 
that  of  Rome,  nor  a  Federal  Empire,  as  was  that  of  modern 

He  remembered  reading  a  few  years  ago  a  remark  made  by 
the  present  Prime  Minister,  that  the  object  of  his  party  was  the 
strengthening  of  the  centre  of  the  Empire,  instead  of  wasting 
our  force  upon  its  outskirts.  The  first  part  of  the  sentence  was 
sound  enough.  But  there  was  a  world  of  fallacy,  and,  as  he 
thought,  of  danger,  in  the  second.  It  showed  in  a  flash  the 
difference  between  the  Imperial  and  the  anti-Imperial  stand- 
point. To  the  Imperialist  the  outskirts  of  the  Empire — India, 
Canada,  New  Zealand,  Natal — were  not  less  important  than 


London,  Liverpool,  or  Birmingham.  We  ought  not  to  think 
more  of  them,  but  we  ought  not  to  think  less.  If  the  Colonies 
had  taken  a  similar  line  we  should  have  had  no  Colonial 
contingents  in  South  Africa.  If  they  should  henceforward  begin 
to  think  mainly  or  exclusively  of  themselves  as  the  inhabitants 
of  these  islands  were  invited  in  this  passage  to  do,  we  should 
very  soon  have  no  Colonies  to  think  about  at  all.  If  there  were 
no  outskirts  there  would  be  no  Empire.  As  America  had 
gone  so  might  Canada,  Australia,  and  South  Africa  go.  There 
were  plenty  of  influences  at  work  to  tempt  or  encourage  the 
severance.  A  sheaf  of  popular  arguments  could  easily  be  found 
for  casting  off  the  Indian  burden.  He  asked  what  this  country 
would  be  without  the  Empire,  and  whether,  when  India  had 
gone  and  the  great  Colonies  had  gone,  they  supposed  we  could 
stop  there.  Our  ports  and  coaling  stations,  our  fortresses  and 
dockyards,  our  Crown  Colonies  and  protectorates,  would  go  too. 
For  either  they  would  be  unnecessary  as  the  toll  gates  and 
barbicans  of  an  Empire  that  had  vanished,  or  they  would  be 
taken  by  an  enemy  more  powerful  than  ourselves.  Then  with  a 
Navy  reduced,  for  there  would  be  nothing  but  these  shores  for 
it  to  defend,  and  with  a  small  Army  confined  to  home  service, 
what  would  be  the  fate  of  our  home  population  ?  England, 
from  having  been  the  arbiter,  would  sink  at  the  best  into  the 
inglorious  playground  of  the  world.  Our  antiquities,  our 
natural  beauties,  our  relics  of  a  once  mighty  sovereignty,  our 
castles  and  cathedrals,  our  mansion-houses  and  parks,  would 
attract  a  crowd  of  wandering  pilgrims.  People  would  come  to 
see  us  just  as  they  climbed  the  Acropolis  at  Athens  or  ascended 
the  waters  of  the  Nile.  A  congested  population,  ministering  to 
our  reduced  wants,  and  unsustained  by  the  enormous  demand 
from  India  and  the  Colonies,  would  lead  a  sordid  existence,  with 
no  natural  outlet  for  its  overflow,  with  no  markets  for  its 
manufactures  beyond  such  as  were  wholly  or  partially  barred 
to  it  by  hostile  tariffs,  with  no  aspiration  but  a  narrow  and 
selfish  materialism,  and  above  all  with  no  training  for  its  man- 
hood. Our  emigrants,  instead  of  proceeding  to  lands  where 
they  could  still  remain  British  citizens  and  live  and  work  under 
the  British  flag,  would  be  swallowed  up  in  the  whirlpool  of 
American  cosmopolitanism,  or  would  be  converted  into  foreigners 
and  aliens.  England  would  become  a  sort  of  glorified  Belgium. 
As  for  the  priceless  asset  of  the  national  character,  without  a 
world  to  conquer  or  a  duty  to  perform,  it  would  rot  of  atrophy 
and  inanition.  (Cheers.) 

Great  Empires  before  now  had  sunk  to  small  States.  It 
might  be  that  in  the  fulness  of  time  the  turn  of  England  would 
come  too.  But  at  least  let  it  not  be  done  of  her  own  act,  and  in 


the  plenitude  of  her  powers.  Whatever  our  politics,  let  us  not 
voluntarily  allow  our  locks  to  be  shorn.  In  Empire  we  had 
found  not  merely  the  key  to  glory  and  wealth,  but  the  call  to 
duty,  and  the  means  of  service  to  mankind.  Let  us  no  more 
forswear  Empire  than  we  would  abjure  our  own  souls.  Such 
being  the  manner  in  which  Empire  had  been  won  and  was  now 
held,  in  what  spirit  should  it  be  administered  or  regarded  ?  The 
answer  to  that  question  would  give  them  the  true  Imperialism. 
If  they  had  an  Empire  they  must  have  Imperialism,  Imperialism 
being  the  essence  and  spirit  of  Empire.  An  Empire  could  not 
be  maintained  without  Imperialism  any  more  than  a  workshop 
could  be  run  without  a  knowledge  of  mechanics,  or  a  picture 
gallery  without  a  sense  of  art.  (Hear,  hear.)  He  repudiated 
the  many  caricatures  which  were  put  forward  with  such 
suspicious  alacrity  by  those  who  were  enemies  to  Imperialism 
because  they  were  enemies  to  Empire  itself.  Sometimes  they 
were  told  that  Imperialism  was  militarism,  which  he  saw  defined 
in  the  dictionaries  as  an  excess  of  the  military  spirit.  He 
confessed  that  to  accuse  us  in  this  country  of  militarism,  when 
it  was  with  the  utmost  difficulty  that  we  obtained  recruits  for 
our  exceedingly  limited  Army,  when  the  soldier's  uniform, 
instead  of  being  regarded  as  it  ought  to  be,  as  a  source  of 
pride,  seemed  generally  to  be  treated  as  if  it  were  something  to 
be  ashamed  of  and  hidden  away,  when  we  were  so  absurdly 
backward  in  military  organisation  that  every  fresh  War 
Minister  sought  to  distinguish  himself  by  inventing  a  new 
military  system  (which  commonly  passed  into  oblivion  along 
with  its  author),  and  so  deficient  in  military  knowledge  that  we 
went  to  war  without  maps  of  the  country  which  we  were  called 
upon  to  invade  or  defend,  when  it  was  notorious  among  foreign 
nations  that  a  British  Government  almost  had  to  be  kicked  and 
cuffed  before  it  would  consent  to  fight,  and  when,  having  gone 
to  war,  we  only  came  through,  if  we  did,  after  a  series  of 
deplorable  fiascoes  and  blunders  at  the  start — he  said  that  to 
accuse  such  a  people  of  being  easily  tempted  into  a  policy  of 
military  adventure  or  braggadocio  was  almost  a  joke.  (Cheers.) 
If,  on  the  other  hand,  militarism  were  held  to  imply  that  upon 
every  nation  was  imposed  the  obligation  of  self-defence,  and 
that  national  independence  did  rest  in  the  last  resort  upon  the 
possession  of  adequate  force,  then  he  wished  that  we  were 
rather  more  militarist  than  we  were  ;  for  he  held  compulsory 
training  to  be  of  the  essence  of  citizenship,  and  he  thought  that 
our  Empire  would  very  likely  some  day  break  down  unless  it 
were  applied.  There  was  no  call  to  'draw  the  sword  from 
the  scabbard  or  to  brandish  it  in  the  air.  It  was  a  common 
saying  that  we  held  India  by  the  sword,  and  in  the  last  resort 


every  dominion  must  rest  upon  the  sanction  of  force.  But 
when  he  went  there  as  Viceroy  he  registered  a  vow  that  he  at 
least  would  never  use  the  phrase,  for  it  seemed  to  him  that  we 
held  India  far  more  by  moral  force  than  by  bayonets  ;  and  in 
seven  years  he  was  never  unfaithful  to  his  pledge.  The  Army 
was  strong  in  India,  stronger  than  in  any  other  part  of  the 
Empire.  But  even  there,  unless  we  were  foolish  enough  to 
impair  the  supremacy  of  the  civil  authority,  militarism  could 
not  prevail.  A  variation  of  the  same  charge  was  the  allegation 
that  Imperialism  meant  jingoism,  which  he  took  to  be  a 
swaggering  and  aggressive  attitude  ;  or  Chauvinism,  an  image 
for  which  we  had  to  cross  the  Channel,  and  which  he  fancied 
meant  the  sort  of  exaggerated  national  pride  that  found  vent  in 
the  war-whoops  of  the  music-hall  stage.  But  music-halls  were 
not  the  council  chambers  of  statesmen,  and  Cabinet  Ministers 
were  not,  or  were  not  supposed  to  be,  comedians,  and  he  doubted 
if  a  public  man  could  now  be  found  in  any  country  who  would 
conduct  a  policy  in  any  such  spirit.  Even  if  there  were,  it  would 
not  be  in  the  ranks  of  Imperialists  that  he  should  expect  to  find 
him.  (Cheers.)  No  generalisation  could  be  more  historically 
inexact  than  to  say  that  Great  Britain  had  been  urged  into  an 
Imperial  career  by  national  vanity  or  territorial  greed.  If  our 
Empire  had  advanced  by  leaps  and  bounds,  it  had  commonly 
been  in  spite  of  our  Government  and  statesmen.  There  was 
hardly  an  important  acquisition  from  which  we  had  not  at  some 
time  or  other  tried  »to  recede.  The  parings  of  the  British 
Empire  throughout  the  world — i.e.,  the  areas  which  it  had  at 
one  time  held  and  had  afterwards  surrendered — would  make  a 
respectable  -empire  of  themselves.  He  could  not  see  how  any 
fair-minded  student  of  history  could  peruse  its  pages  without 
realising  that,  however  our  Empire  had  grown  great,  it  had 
certainly  not  been  from  the  passion  of  territorial  cupidity  or 
from  an  appetite  for  dimensions.  (Cheers.) 

Among  the  false  images  of  Imperialism  which  had  been  set 
up  by  its  enemies,  there  was  one  only  against  which  he  thought 
that  we  ought  to  be  on  our  guard.  In  a  country  so  qualified  as 
ours  by  aptitude  and  experience  for  the  pursuit  of  commerce  there 
was  always  a  fear  that  empire  might  rest  upon  too  material  a 
basis.  Commercialism  and  materialism  were  dangers  against 
which  the  Imperialist  required  to  be  specially  upon  his  guard. 
The  maxim  that  trade  followed  the  flag  suggested  the  planting 
of  the  flag  in  order  that  it  might  be  followed  by  trade.  In  his 
view  the  reverse  was  much  more  historically  correct — namely, 
that  the  flag  followed  the  trade.  (Cheers.)  They  had  seen 
how  our  Empire  had  been  developed  until  it  had  attained  its 
present  form,  and  that  Imperialism  was  the  spirit  in  which  the 


problem  of  Empire  was  handled.  That  spirit  involved  both  a 
conviction,  a  policy,  and  a  hope.  The  conviction  was  the  firm 
belief  that  the  Empire  represented  no  mere  fortuitous  concourse 
of  atoms  which  by  a  succession  of  accidents  had  been  united 
under  the  hegemony  of  the  British  Crown,  but  that  it  was  a 
preordained  dispensation,  intended  to  be  a  source  of  strength 
and  discipline  to  ourselves  and  of  moral  and  material  blessing 
to  others.  It  had  been  said  that  the  first  great  Imperialist 
was  Oliver  Cromwell.  A  long  succession  from  Chatham  and 
Pitt  to  Beaconsfield,  and  Cromer  and  Chamberlain  had  handed 
on  the  sacred  torch.  Each  of  these  men  had  been  firmly 
convinced  of  the  destiny  of  his  country.  The  same  belief  shone 
out  from  the  speeches  of  another  great  Imperialist,  Lord 
Milner.  An  honourable  pride  in  our  inheritance,  a  belief  that 
it  carried  with  it  great  obligations,  and  a  resolve  to  retain  it 
intact  were  characteristics  of  the  life  work  of  all  these  men. 
He  believed  these  sentiments  to  be  shared  by  the  great  majority 
of  the  working  classes  of  this  Empire.  He  was  not  himself  a 
believer  in  Socialism,  though  there  was  much  to  attract  in  the 
Socialist  ideal.  But  even  were  he  a  Socialist,  he  would  see  no 
reason  why  his  ideas  should  not  be  set  in  the  framework  of  an 
Empire  as  well  as  in  that  of  an  industrial  Republic.  But  it  was 
certain  that,  if  the  Empire  of  the  future  was  to  continue,  it 
must  rest  upon  a  democratic  basis  and  must  satisfy  democratic 
ideals.  He  declined  altogether  to  believe  that  this  was  an 
impossible  aspiration.  Whether  democracies  would  possess  the 
sobriety  and  the  patience,  the  breadth  of  view,  and  the  tenacity 
to  maintain  great  Empires  intact  remained  to  be  proved.  That 
democracies  would  have  the  sense  and  the  insight  to  understand 
Empire  and  to  incorporate  it  in  their  political  formulas  he 
entertained  no  doubt. 

Imperialism,  however,  must  give  us  more  than  a  conviction. 
In  the  case  of  the  British  Empire,  at  any  rate,  it  would  ill 
justify  itself  unless  it  were  to  furnish  us  with  a  policy.  What 
that  policy  must  be  was  clear.  The  Empire  was  still  only  in  a 
fluid  and  transitional  formation  ;  it  had  yet  to  be  welded  into 
a  great  World-State.  The  constituents  were  there  ;  the  spirit 
was  there  ;  but  the  problems  were  still  unsolved  and  the  plan 
had  yet  to  be  produced.  We  had  so  to  work  that  the  concentric 
rings  should  continue  to  revolve  round  the  central  star,  not 
merely  because  it  had  hitherto  been  the  law  of  their  being,  but 
because  it  was  their  interest  and  their  voluntary  choice.  In 
the  economy  of  the  Imperial  household  we  were  dealing  not 
with  children  but  with  grown  men.  At  our  table  were 
seated  not  dependents  or  menials,  but  partners  as  free  as 
ourselves,  and  with  aspirations  not  less  ample  or  keen.  That 


they  were  bound  to  us  by  sentiment  was  a  priceless  asset  ;  to 
throw  it  away  would  be  a  criminal  blunder.  This  was  the 
colonial  problem.  The  Indian  problem  was  much  more  difficult, 
for  there  we  were  dealing,  not  with  young  and  ardent 
democracies  of  our  own  blood,  but  with  a  society  cast  in  a 
conservative  and  rigid  mould,  divorced  from  our  own  by 
religion,  custom,  and  race,  though  here,  too,  a  spirit  of 
nationality  was  moving  on  the  face  of  the  waters,  and  un- 
suspecting forces  were  dimly  struggling  to  light.  It  was 
vain,  however,  to  pretend  that  India  could  be  granted  self- 
government  on  the  colonial  lines.  It  would  mean  ruin  to 
India  and  treason  to  our  trust.  The  Empire  could  not  apply 
the  same  policy  to  the  Colonies  as  to  India  ;  but  it  could  be 
animated  by  the  same  spirit  and  it  could  pursue  the  same 
end,  which  was  continued  and  contented  incorporation  in  the 
Imperial  union  ;  albeit,  here  again  the  limits  of  disruption 
would  be  very  different.  Were  the  Colonies  to  break  away 
they  would  survive  and  ultimately  flourish,  but  the  Empire 
would  be  weakened.  Were  India  to  be  lost  she  herself  would 
reel  back  into  chaos,  and  the  British  Empire,  at  any  rate  in 
Asia,  would  perish.  (Cheers.)  As  he  had  said,  the  policy  of 
Imperialism  was  confronted  with  many  problems  which  it 
must  attempt  to  solve.  They  would  keep  it  fully  occupied 
for  generations  to  come.  The  mechanical  problem — i.e.,  the 
problem  of  conquering  distance — was  being  rendered  less 
formidable  every  day  by  the  astonishing  development  in 
electricity  and  steam,  although  in  one  case,  that  of  India, 
the  shrinkage  that  resulted  cut  both  ways,  bringing  the  two 
countries  physically  nearer — a  condition  which  facilitated 
communication,  and  therefore  knowledge,  between  the  two — 
but  estranging  the  heart  of  the  Englishman  in  India  from  his 
work,  a  consequence  which  was  in  every  way  to  be  deplored. 
The  racial  problem  must  always  remain  an  anxious  one,  since 
when  excited  it  was  capable  of  transcending  all  others  in 
explosive  energy  and  importance.  The  political  or  adminis- 
trative problem  would  also  have  to  be  faced.  It  was  impossible 
for  the  Empire  to  continue  permanently  to  be  governed  by  the 
existing  organisation.  Some  form  of  Imperial  council,  advisory 
if  no  more,  must  sooner  or  later  emerge.  The  defence  problem 
— i.e.,  the  question  how  the  Empire  was  to  divide  the  burden  of 
military  and  naval  defence  between  its  members — and  the  tariff 
problem,  or  the  question  whether  the  Empire  could  be  made 
more  self-contained  and  self-sufficing  in  respect  of  its  trade, 
were  still  only  in  the  preliminary  stages  of  evolution.  At  least 
a  quarter  of  century  would  elapse  before  they  were  solved,  if 
then.  Of  one  thing  he  was  certain — viz.,  that  in  proper  hands 
P.W.  Q 


the  Crown  would  become,  if  not  more  powerful  at  any  rate  more 
indispensable  and  more  important.  He  looked  forward  to  the 
day  when  the  Sovereign  would  visit  his  dominions  in  person, 
and  hold  his  Court  in  Calcutta  or  Quebec.  Nor  could  he 
imagine  any  stronger  cement  of  Empire  than  that  its  Govern- 
ment and  unity,  as  typified  by  the  Sovereign,  should  from  time 
to  time  be  incarnated  in  the  allied  States  or  dominions.  rlhe 
capital  of  the  Empire  would  probably  never  leave  London. 
But  there  was  no  stationary  necessity  or  obligation  in  the 
Crown.  (Cheers.) 

He  had  sketched  the  tasks,  the  urgent  and  paramount  tasks, 
with  which  the  Imperialism  of  the  near  future  was  charged. 
That  any  other  policy  or  any  other  political  creed  could 
successfully  solve  them  there  was  no  reason  to  believe.  Insular 
Radicalism  could  not  solve  them  ;  cosmopolitanism  could  not  ; 
Socialism  could  not.  To  Imperialism  alone  could  they  look  to 
satisfy  the  needs  and  to  hold  together  the  framework  of  the 
British  Dominion.  (Cheers.)  But  if  Imperialism  was  to  play 
this  part,  let  them  be  sure  that  it  was  animated  by  the  supreme 
idea,  without  which  it  was  only  as  sounding  brass  and  a  tinkling 
cymbal — namely,  the  sense  of  sacrifice  and  the  idea  of  duty. 
Empire  could  only  be  achieved  with  satisfaction  or  maintained 
with  advantage  provided  it  had  a  moral  basis.  To  the  people 
of  the  mother  State  it  must  be  a  discipline,  an  inspiration,  and 
a  faith.  To  the  people  of  the  circumference,  it  must  be  more 
than  a  flag  or  a  name,  it  must  give  them  what  they  could 
not  otherwise  or  elsewhere  enjoy  ;  not  merely  justice  or  order, 
or  material  prosperity,  but  the  sense  of  partnership  in  a  great 
idea,  the  consecrating  influence  of  a  lofty  purpose.  As  to  the 
future,  if  he  found  any  audience  of  his  countrymen  who  were 
plunged  in  doubt  as  to  what  it  might  bring  forth,  and  who 
wondered  whether  the  handwriting  might  not  already  be 
tracing  its  sentence  on  the  wall  of  our  Empire,  as  it  had  done 
upon  those  of  Babylon,  and  Nineveh,  and  Rome,  he  would 
say  to  them,  "  Have  no  such  craven  fears.  From  the  sordid 
controversies  and  the  sometimes  depressing  gloom  of  our  insular 
existence  look  forth,  and,  if  the  summons  conies  to  you,  go 
forth,  into  the  larger  fields  of  Empire  where  duty  still  calls  and 
an  illimitable  horizon  opens.  Preserve  with  faithful  attach- 
ment the  acquisition  of  our  forefathers,  not  tabulating  them  with 
vulgar  pride,  but  accepting  the  legacy  with  reverence,  and 
holding  no  sacrifice  too  great  to  maintain  it.  Be  sure  that  in 
our  national  character,  if  we  can  keep  it  high  and  undefiled, 
still  lies  our  national  strength.  Count  it  no  shame  to  acknow- 
ledge our  Imperial  mission,  but,  on  the  contrary,  the  greatest 
disgrace  to  be  untrue  to  it,  and  even  if  God  no  longer  thunders 


from  Sinai,  and  His  oracles  are  sometimes  reported  dumb,  cling 
humbly  but  fervently  to  the  belief  that  so  long  as  we  are 
worthy  we  may  still  remain  one  of  the  instruments  through 
whom  He  chooses  to  speak  to  mankind."  (Loud  cheers.) 

EXERCISE  No.  15. 

Lord  Cromer  was  the  guest  at  luncheon  yesterday  of  the 
Glasgow  and  West  of  Scotland  Unionist  Free  Trade  Club. 
The,  company,  who  numbered  about  200,  were  presided  over  by 
Mr.  J.  G.  A.  Baird,  and  included  Lord  Balfour  of  Burleigh,  Sir 
Hugh  Shaw-Stewart,  Sir  Charles  Bine  Renshaw,  Sir  J. 
Stirling-Maxwell,  Mr.  Cameron  Corbett,  M.P.,  Mr.  Alex. 
Cross,  M.P.,  Mr.  St.  Loe  Strachey,  and  Dr.  Robert  Gourlay 
(chairman  of  the  club). 

The  Chairman,  in  proposing  "  The  Empire,  the  Union,  and 
Free  Trade,"  said  that  we  had  been  told  to  think  Imperially 
and  invited  to  make  sacrifices.  That  was  all  very  well  ;  but 
who  were  to  make  the  sacrifices  ?  The  man  in  comfortable 
circumstances  might,  but  the  poor  man  could  not.  There  was  a 
danger  if  the  idea  got  into  the  heads  of  the  electors  that  the 
Empire  was  too  great  a  burden  for  their  shoulders.  When 
the  people  talked  of  consolidating  the  Empire  they  usually 
thought  of  Canada,  Australia,  New  Zealand,  and  South  Africa, 
but  they  never  mentioned  that  part  of  the  British  dominions 
which  really  constituted  the  Empire — the  great  dependency  of 
India.  (Cheers.)  They  heard  very  little  about  how  India  was 
to  be  treated  if  the  tariff  reformers  had  their  way.  The  second 
head  of  the  toast  was  the  Union,  the  common  rallying  ground 
for  Unionists  of  all  descriptions.  (Cheers.)  Upon  the  third 
head  the  chairman  remarked  that  their  opponents  were  not 
over  civil  in  their  fiscal  controversy,  and  thought  it  might  very 
well  be  carried  out  without  those  amenities.  Cobdenite  was 
used  as  a  term  of  reproach,  but  nobody  ever  mentioned  Sir 
Robert  Peel,  the  Minister  who  introduced  free  trade,  as  a  name 
for  reproach.  (Hear,  hear.)  It  might  be  that  they  would  incur 
censure  for  holding  that  meeting  and  for  endeavouring  to 
introduce  a  split  into  the  Unionist  party,  but  there  was  another 
loyalty  which  was  far  above  party  loyalty,  and  that  was  loyalty 
to  the  best  interests  of  their  country.  (Cheers.) 

Lord  Cromer,  in  replying  to  the  toast,  said  : — Mr.  Baird  and 


Gentlemen, — A  short  time  ago  I  was  present  at  a  meeting  of  the 
Unionist  Free  Trade  Club  in  London,  on  which  occasion  I  had 
to  answer  a  toast  similar  to  that  with  which  the  chairman 
has  done  me  the  honour  to  couple  my  name.  Subsequently,  I 
heard  from  many  quarters  that  we  were  a  politically  insignificant 
body,  and  that,  unless  we  were  ready  to  abandon  one  of  our 
most  cherished  principles,  we  could  not  hope  to  exercise  any 
influence  on  the  opinions  of  our  fellow-countrymen.  What 
are  those  principles  ?  They  are  twofold.  In  the  first  place,  we 
hold  that  there  should  be  no  tampering  with  the  links  which 
bind  together  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britain  and 
Ireland.  In  the  second  place,  we  maintain  that  freedom  of 
trade  should  continue  to  be  the  basis  of  our  fiscal  policy.  It 
seems  to  be  held  by  some  Unionists  that  those  who  are  unwilling 
to  cast  to  the  winds  the  second  of  these  two  vital  principles 
should  be  ostracised  from  the  Unionist  party,  although  a 
tendency,  which  we  may  welcome,  has  recently  been  evinced 
to  mitigate  the  severity  of  this  sentence.  Now  ostracism  is  a 
Greek  word,  and  I  have  no  great  liking  for  the  importation  of 
these  strange  foreign  terms,  which  often  clash  with  our  ideas 
of  liberty,  into  British  political  discussions.  Nevertheless,  in 
this  particular  case,  an  unconscious  compliment  is  paid  to  free- 
traders ;  for  according  to  no  less  an  authority  than  Aristotle, 
who  may  be  assumed  to  have  known  something  of  the  subject, 
ostracism  was  a  handy  method  adopted  by  the  Athenians  for 
getting  rid  of  some  of  the  most  eminent  of  their  fellow-citizens. 
According  to  this  definition,  therefore,  Unionist  free-traders, 
though  they  may  be  insignificant,  are  at  the  same  time  eminent. 
The  two  adjectives  seem  to  me  to  clash  somewhat  with  each 
other.  Well,  gentlemen,  in  spite  of  the  gulf  of  political  insigni- 
ficance which  yawns  before  them,  and  in  spite  of  the  threat  to 
adopt  drastic  Athenian  procedures  against  those  who  place 
principles  before  party,  I  find  not  the  least  disposition  to 
abandon  those  principles  on  the  part  of  those  with  whom  I  am 
proud  to  be  associated  in  London.  On  the  contrary,  unless  I 
am  very  much  mistaken,  a  strong  disposition  exists  to  hold  fast 
to  them.  Does  this  same  spirit  animate  the  Unionist  free- 
traders in  Glasgow?  I  hope  and  believe  that  your  presence 
here  to-day  shows  that  it  does.  (Cheers.) 

Before  going  any  further,  I  should  like  to  say  a  few  words  in 
answer  to  some  of  the  criticisms — always  most  friendly  and 
courteous  criticisms — which  have  been  made  upon  the  speech 
which  I  delivered  recently  in  London.  I  was  criticised  for 
adhering  to  what  some  call  an  antiquated  fiscal  faith  which,  it  is 
alleged,  has  served  its  time.  Well,  I  greatly  prefer  adherence 
to  a  system  of  proved  merit  rather  than  rushing  blindfold  into 


a  radical  change,  the  results  of  which  not  the  wisest  amongst  us 
can  foretell.  Amongst  numerous  other  advantages,  I  believe 
that  the  fiscal  faith  to  which  we  hold,  antiquated  though  it 
may  be,  is  a  safeguard  against  the  creation  of  those  huge 
trusts,  which  have  done  so  much  harm  in  America  and  which 
are  to  a  great  extent  the  outcome  of  protection.  Free  trade, 
moreover,  has  more  especially  benefited  the  poorest  classes  of 
the  community.  Statistics  of  prices  and  wages  show  that  a 
labourer  gets  about  65  per  cent.,  a  factory  operative  75  per  cent., 
and  a  skilled  mechanic  90  per  cent,  more  of  the  necessaries  of 
life  than  he  did  50  years  ago.  Free  trade  has  not,  of  course, 
been  the  sole  cause  of  this  remarkable  improvement,  but  it  cannot 
be  doubted  that  it  has  been  one  of  the  principal  contributory 
causes.  Then,  again,  I  have  been  told  that  1  have  lived  for 
so  long  abroad  that  I  have  lost  touch  with  British  public 
opinion.  I  daresay  this  is  quite  true.  Certainly  I  find  it  very 
difficult  at  times  to  differentiate  between  Liberals  and 
Conservatives,  and  still  more  difficult  to  define,  with  any 
degree  of  precision,  the  political  faith  of  either  party.  At 
times,  again,  I  am  somewhat  puzzled  at  the  subtle  distinctions 
between  protectionists  and  tariff  reformers,  and  it  may  be  that 
my  doubts  and  hesitations  are  shared  by  others  who  have  not 
lived  for  so  long  abroad  as  myself.  But  my  bewilderment 
reaches  its  climax  when  I  endeavour  to  classify  Socialists.  They 
crop  up  in  the  most  strange  places  ;  occasionally,  which  is 
natural  enough,  on  the  extreme  left  of  the  Liberal  party,  and 
again  amongst  ardent  tariff  reformers  on  the  extreme  right  of 
the  Conservative  party.  There  is,  however,  nothing  really 
surprising  in  this  latter  connection.  Socialists  and  extreme 
tariff  reformers,  who  are  really  protectionists,  meet  in  Australia 
and  elsewhere  on  the  common  ground  that  each  entertain  an 
exaggerated  belief  in  the  power  of  the  State  to  remedy  economic 

To  return  to  the  criticisms  on  my  recent  speech,  I  wish  to  say 
that  when  speaking  in  London  my  observations  bore  chiefly 
upon  the  changes  which  would  result  in  our  foreign  relations  if 
our  free-trade  policy  were  abandoned.  I  cannot  help  thinking 
that  the  best  way  of  ascertaining  the  opinions  which  exist  in 
foreign  parts  is  to  live  amongst  foreigners.  This  is  what  I  have 
done  for  many  years  past.  Speaking  as  a  convinced  Imperialist 
to  other  Imperialists,  and  speaking  also  as  one  who  has  been  a 
good  deal  concerned  in  the  execution  of  a  policy  of  Imperialism, 
I  said  that  free  trade  was  the  most  sound  basis  on  which  that 
policy  could  rest  ;  that  a  return  to  protection  or  preference 
would  tend  to  stimulate  whatever  latent  Anglophobia  exists  in 
the  world,  and  would  thus  probably  lead  to  an  increase  in  our 


naval  and  military  expenditure.  I  adhere  to  every  word  of  this 
statement.  Various  answers  have  been  made  to  my  argument, 
but  I  venture  to  think  that  none  of  them  are  adequate.  In  the 
first  place,  I  have  been  told  that  we  may  surely  do  what  we  like 
in  our  own  territory.  I  fully  agree.  Every  man,  if  he  chooses, 
has  a  right  to  cut  off  his  nose  to  spite  his  face  ;  but  most  wise 
men  forbear  from  executing  this  operation.  In  the  second 
place,  I  have  been  told  that  other  nations  have  adopted  a 
protectionist  policy  without  incurring  any  special  animosity  on 
the  part  of  their  -neighbours.  This  also  is  quite  true  ;  but 
what  other  nation  possesses  an  Empire  like  ours  ?  It  is  world- 
wide. We  boast  that  the  sun  never  sets  on  the  dominions  of 
the  King  of  England.  To  find  any  case  analogous  to  that  of  the 
British  Empire  we  must  go  back  to  the  days  of  Ancient  Rome. 
I  say,  therefore,  that  we  must  adapt  our  policy  to  the  special 
circumstances  in  which  we  are  placed.  In  the  third  place,  I 
have,  as  was  to  be  anticipated,  been  told  that  we  can  defy 
opposition.  This  is  what  I  may  call  the  familiar  "  Who's 
afraid  ?"  argument.  It  appears  to  me,  however,  that  there  is  a 
very  great  distinction  between  a  craven  truckling  to  foreign 
nations  and  adopting  the  attitude  of  the  proverbial  Irishman  at 
a  fair,  who  goes  about  asking  if  anybody  would  like  to  tread  on 
the  tail  of  his  coat.  I  say  that  we  want  to  maintain  the  peace, 
if  we  can  honourably  do  so,  and  that  a  free-trade  policy 
makes  for  peace,  whereas  a  protectionist  policy  tends  in  the 
opposite  direction.  (Cheers.) 

There  is  one  other  criticism  to  which  I  should  wish  to  allude 
briefly.  It  has  been  stated  that,  although  I  may  be  a  free- 
trader in  England,  I  approved  of  a  protectionist  policy  in 
Egypt.  This  is  a  purely  personal  argument.  Had  I  been  ever 
so  protectionist  in  Egypt  I  do  not  see  that  the  fact  would  help 
the  tariff  reformers  much,  although  it  might  show  that  I  was 
guilty  of  inconsistency.  But,  in  fact,  although  I  do  not  say  that 
the  present  Egyptian  practices  as  regards  both  Customs  and 
Excise  duties  are  everything  I  could  wish,  the  fiscal  policy 
adopted  of  recent  years  in  Egypt,  so  far  from  bearing  the 
smallest  resemblance  to  protection,  has  on  all  essential  points 
been  based  on  free-trade  principles.  I  will  state  the  facts 
briefly.  At  the  commencement  of  the  British  occupation  an  8 
per  cent,  ad  valorem  Customs  duty  was  imposed  on  all  goods 
coming  into  the  country.  Also,  in  all  the  towns,  and  even  in  many 
of  the  principal  villages,  an  octroi  duty  of  9  per  cent,  was 
levied  on  local  produce.  The  latter  pressed  far  more  hardly 
on  the  population,  and  especially  on  the  poorer  classes,  than 
the  Customs  duty.  It  has  been  completely  abolished.  Moreover, 
the  8  per  cent.  Customs  duty  has  been  reduced  to  4  per  cent,  on 


coal,  timber,  live  stock,  petroleum,  and  on  some  other  articles. 
I  wish,  moreover,  to  observe  that  whether  the  Customs  duty  in 
Egypt  is  levied  at  8  or  4  per  cent.,  or  at  any  other  figure,  it  does 
not  in  any  way  offend  against  free-trade  principles.  It  is 
imposed  for  strictly  revenue  purposes  ;  and  I  am  not  aware 
that  any  free-trader  objects  to  the  imposition  of  Customs  duties 
for  such  purposes,  although  he  may  regret  the  necessity  for 
doing  so.  What  free-traders  object  to  is  the  imposition  of 
Custom  duties  for  protective  purposes.  (Hear,  hear.)  Now, 
the  only  important  case  which  has  occurred  in  Egypt  where  this 
special  issue  was  raised  was  in  connection  with  the  duty  on 
cotton  goods.  Until  a  few  years  ago,  there  were  no  cotton 
factories  in  Egypt.  When  they  were  established,  an  Excise 
duty,  equivalent  to  the  Customs  duty,  was  put  on  the  indigenous 
manufacturers.  Otherwise,  local  industry  would  have  been 
protected.  This  Excise  duty,  which  is  similar  to  that  which 
used  to  be  levied  on  certain  articles  in  the  United  Kingdom  but 
a  few  years  ago,  and  which  is  now  levied  in  India,  was  not 
imposed  in  order  to  please  Manchester,  as  is  sometimes 
alleged,  but  in  order  to  prevent  an  artificial  industry  from 
springing  up,  and  in  order  to  safeguard  the  Customs  revenue  of 

I  pass  on  to  fresh  ground.  I  do  not  think,  in  speaking  to  the 
present  company,  that  I  need  dwell  on  the  well-known 
arguments  in  support  of  a  free -trade  policy.  I  take  it  for 
granted  that  we  are  all  free-traders  here,  or,  if  we  are  tariff 
reformers,  we  adopt  that  appellation  in  a  somewhat  different 
sense  from  that  in  which  it  is  generally  used.  I  am  a  tariff 
reformer.  I  should  like  to  see  the  duty  on  sugar  reduced.  I 
think  that  would  be  an  excellent  tariff  reform  Leaving  aside, 
therefore,  these  familiar  points,  I  wish  to  say  that  the  more  one 
reflects  on  the  subject,  the  more  does  it  appear  that  what  lies  at 
the  root  of  the  whole  matter  is  the  question  of  public  expendi- 
ture. If  free-traders  once  recognise  what  I  take  to  be  the  main 
article  of  the  tariff  reformers' faith — namely,  that  it  is  absolutely 
necessary  to  raise  a  large  additional  revenue,  they  may,  it  is 
true,  fall  back  on  their  second  line  of  defence,  and  urge  that  the 
revenue  should  not  be  raised  by  increasing  indirect  taxation. 
But  then,  to  be  logical,  they  must  indicate  how  the  revenue 
should  be  raised,  and  in  dealing  with  this  question  it  has  to  be 
borne  in  mind  that  direct  taxation  is  already  objectionably 
high.  The  main  point,  therefore,  appears  to  me  to  be  this — Is 
the  additional  revenue  really  required?  And  this  brings  me 
naturally  to  the  consideration  of  another  point — namely,  Is  a 
very  costly  non-contributory  old-age  pension  scheme  desirable 
and  justifiable  ?  On  this  point,  you  have  lately  had  the 


good  fortune  in  Glasgow  to  hear  the  opinions  of  an 
ex-Minister,  and  a  very  successful  ex-Minister,  under  whom 
it  was  my  privilege  to  serve  for  many  years.  What  did 
Lord  Lansdowne  say  on  this  subject  ?  He  said  that 
the  universal  application  of  a  non-contributory  old-age 
pension  scheme  was  a  policy  which  "  spelt  disaster,"  both  on 
account  of  its  cost  and  on  account  of  the  demoralisation  which 
it  would  bring  to  all  concerned.  As  to  the  demoralisation, 
there  cannot,  in  my  opinion,  be  a  shadow  of  a  doubt.  It  would 
lead  me  too  far  afield  were  I  now  to  attempt  to  deal  with  this 
important  question  at  any  length  ;  but  I  may  say  that  I 
have  passed  the  greater  part  of  my  life  in  countries  where  the 
State  is  expected  to  do  everything,  and  where  the  people  do 
very  little  for  themselves.  I  have  had  good  opportunities  of 
judging  of  the  apathy,  the  helplessness,  and,  to  use  Lord  Lans- 
downe's  own  expressive  phrase,  the  demoralisation  produced  by 
this  system.  It  is  both  with  surprise  and  keen  regret  that  I  find, 
on  my  return  to  political  life  in  this  country,  an  endeavour 
being  made  to  foster  the  growth  of  the  noxious  plant  which  for 
years  past  I  and  many  others  with  me  have  been  doing  our 
utmost  to  eradicate  in  other  countries.  Self-help  has,  up  to  the 
present  time,  been  the  mainstay  of  our  national  character.  Let 
us,  in  the  name  of  commonsense,  pause  before  we  throw  this 
priceless  jewel  away.  I  find  it  very  difficult  to  believe  that  the 
best  and  most  intelligent  amongst  the  working  men  of  this 
country,  when  they  come  to  reflect  on  the  matter,  will  not  wish 
that  they  and  their  families  should  be  independent  of  assistance 
afforded  to  them  by  the  general  body  of  taxpayers.  (Cheers.) 
As  to  expenditure,  a  very  competent  authority  has  been  kind 
enough  to  furnish  me  with  figures  showing  the  net  increase  in 
the  revenue  raised  from  taxation,  both  Imperial  and  local, 
during  the  last  ten  years.  It  comes  to  rather  over  60  millions — 
that  is  to  say,  for  ten  years  the  average  increase  in  the  burden 
laid  on  the  people  of  this  country  has  been  no  less  than  six 
millions  annually.  It  is  now  apparently  proposed  to  add  a  very 
large  sum  to  provide  for  a  universal  old-age  pension  scheme  on 
a  non-contributory  basis.  There  appears,  so  far  as  we  yet 
know,  to  be  no  intention  of  providing  the  whole  of  the  huge 
amount  which  will  be  necessary  at  once  ;  but  a  beginning  is  to 
be  made.  Now,  from  the  point  of  view  of  a  financier,  I  always 
mistrust  these  beginnings.  In  1853  one  of  the  greatest  financiers 
of  the  age,  Mr.  Gladstone,  made  a  beginning  to  get  rid  of  the 
income-tax.  A  very  elaborate  and  what,  at  the  time,  appeared 
to  be  a  very  reasonable  plan  was  conceived  to  get  rid  of  the  tax 
in  seven  years.  We  know  what  happened.  The  Crimean  War 
and  a  number  of  other  unforeseen  events  occurred,  with  the 


result  that  the  scheme  came  to  nothing.  And  this  will  always, 
probably,  occur  with  any  large  financial  plan  of  wide  scope 
which  is  based  upon  a  future  which  no  one  can,  in  the  smallest 
degree,  foretell.  (Hear,  hear.) 

It  is  also  to  be  remembered  that  old-age  pensions  will 
not  be  the  only  fresh  claim  upon  the  public  purse.  There 
is  education — a  class  of  expenditure  which  I  do  not  at 
all  grudge,  provided  the  money  is  forthcoming  without 
additional  taxation,  and  provided  it  is  well  spent.  Then 
there  is  the  question  of  maintaining  the  efficiency  of  the 
Army  and  Navy.  We  may,  indeed,  indulge  in  a  pious  hope 
that  public  opinion  on  the  Continent  will  eventually  force 
rulers  to  abandon  the  ruinous  race  in  armaments  in  which  they 
are  now  engaged  ;  but  until  this  Utopia  has  been  realised — and 
there  does  not  seem  much  prosp'ect  of  its  speedy  realisation — we 
certainly  cannot  afford  to  lag  behind.  The  time  may  arrive 
when  we  shall  have  to  fight  for  our  national  existence.  It 
would  be  madness  in  any  Government  not  to  recognise  this 
unquestionable  fact  and  to  be  prepared  for  it.  I  ask,  Where  is 
all  this  money  to  come  from  ?  No  country  can  stand  increasing 
its  public  expenditure  at  the  rate  which  it  has  been  increased  of 
late  years  in  the  United  Kingdom,  and  even  to  enhance 
the  rate  of  progression,  without  crippling  its  national  resources 
and  impeding  its  own  development.  We  are,  indeed,  some- 
times told  that  any  fresh  taxes  which  may  be  imposed  will  not 
bear  upon  the  working  man.  Now,  every  one  who  has  studied 
questions  of  this  sort  knows  that  nothing  is  more  difficult 
than  to  work  out  beforehand  the  incidence  of  a  new  tax,  and 
particularly  of  an  indirect  tax.  I  shall  be  very  much  surprised 
if,  in  whatsoever  form  new  taxation  is  imposed,  it  does  not,  in 
some  form  or  another,  hit  the  working  man.  Notably,  there 
cannot  be  a  greater  error  than  to  suppose  that  the  working 
man  is  never  touched  by  imposing  a  duty  on  an  article  which 
he  does  not  consume.  I  shall  be  still  more  surprised  if  a  non- 
contributory  old-age  pension  scheme,  however  skilfully  the 
details  may  be  arranged,  does  not  result  in  the  thrifty  being 
made  to  pay  for  those  who  are  unthrifty,  and  the  industrious 
having  to  support  the  idle.  (Cheers.)  Then,  again,  we  are  told 
by  those  who  wish  to  broaden  the  basis  of  taxation  that  the  net 
should  be  spread  very  wide,  and  that  a  small  tax  should  be 
imposed  on  a  large  number  of  articles.  In  dealing  with  this 
subject,  which  in  past  days  has  frequently  been  discussed,  it 
has  to  be  remembered  that  no  system  of  taxation  which  the 
mind  of  man  has  yet  devised  is  free  from  objections  of  one  sort 
or  another.  If  few  taxes  are  imposed,  their  pressure  is,  almost 
of  necessity,  unequal  and  uncertain.  If  the  State  resorts  to  the 


imposition  of  a  large  number  of  small  taxes,  the  cost  of  collec- 
tion is  greatly  increased,  owing  to  the  numerous  official  staff 
whose  services  will  be  required  ;  very  complex  legislation  of  one 
sort  or  another  becomes  necessary,  and  the  system  necessarily 
brings  in  its  train  a  deal  of  vexatious  interference  with  individual 
freedom  to  which  the  inhabitants  of  this  country  are  unaccus- 
tomed, and  which  they  are  specially  prone  to  resent.  A  French 
Finance  Minister  once  said  that  the  art  of  taxation  consisted  in 
plucking  the  goose  so  as  to  get  the  largest  possible  amount  of 
feathers  with  a  minimum  amount  of  squealing.  Our  present 
Customs  system,  although  on  some  points  it  may  be  justly  open 
to  criticism,  appears  to  meet  this  practical  requirement  as  well  as, 
and  perhaps  better  than,  any  other  which  fallible  human  beings 
have  as  yet  devised.  It  has  worked  well  for  many  years. 
Unless  more  cogent  reasons  than  we  have  yet  heard  can  be 
advanced  for  effecting  a  radical  change,  we  had  better  leave  its 
main  principles  alone.  Beware,  therefore,  I  say,  of  this  new- 
born and  ill-advised  enthusiasm  for  fresh  taxation.  Like  a 
depraved  appetite,  it  will  grow  with  the  food  which  nourishes 
it.  (Cheers.)  In  past  days  a  good  deal  used  to  be  said  of  what 
was  called  the  "ignorant  impatience  of  taxation."  I  most 
earnestly  hope  that  the  attempt,  which  is  now  apparently  being 
made,  to  stimulate  an  unnatural  impatience  of  taxes  because 
there  are  not  enough  of  them,  will  prove  unsuccessful. 

Again,  we  are  often  told  that  it  is  no  use  to  lay  a  policy  of 
pure  negations  before  the  electors  of  this  country.  We  must 
have  some  positive  proposals  to  submit  to  them.  Something,  it  is 
said,  must  be  done.  That,  I  venture  to  think,  is  a  very  dangerous 
frame  of  mind  for  a  responsible  politician  ;  for  if  he  once  recognises 
that  something  has  to  be  done,  without  having  a  clear  idea  of 
what  should  be  done,  he  will  not  improbably  end  in  doing  a 
good  many  things  which  he  will  afterwards  wish  had  been  left 
undone.  I  speak  under  some  disadvantage  on  this  subject,  for 
I  do  not  profess  to  be  versed  in  the  science  of  electoral 
manipulation.  Nevertheless,  I  would  ask,  Is  it  not  a  positive 
policy  to  provide  for  our  national  defence  by  means  which  will 
not  involve  a  risk  of  killing  the  goose  with  the  golden  egg,  by 
the  imposition  of  fresh  taxes  ?  Is  it  not  a  positive  policy  to 
enforce  economy,  and  to  see  that  we  get  true  value  for  the 
money  spent  on  our  Army,  our  Navy,  our  educational  system, 
and  other  branches  of  the  public  service  ?  Is  it  not  a  positive 
policy  to  endeavour  to  reduce  taxation  and  to  leave  the  money 
which  would  otherwise  pour  into  the  Treasury,  to  fructify  in 
the  pockets  of  the  people  ?  Is  it  not  a  positive  policy  to  take 
up  some  of  the  many  social  and  national  questions  which  may 
be  solved  without  incurring  enormous  additional  expenditure, 


such,  for  instance,  as  tbe  question  of  local  taxation,  which  loudly 
calls  for  treatment  ?  Is  it  not  a  positive  policy  to  take  up 
seriously  the  question  of  modifying  the  composition  of  the 
Upper  Chamber  ?  Is  it  not  a  positive  policy  to  ask  for  time  to 
reflect  on  radical  changes  and  to  study  their  probable  effect, 
instead  of  rushing  helter-skelter  we  know  not  whither  ?  It 
seems  to  me  that  this  is  not  only  a  positive,  but  a  very  wise 
policy.  Such  a  policy,  I  venture  to  assert,  would  be  regarded 
with  much  greater  equanimity,  not  only  by  free-traders,  but  by 
all  the  most  intelligent  classes  of  this  country,  than  one  which 
involves  frequent  attempts  to  pull  up  our  fiscal  and  constitu- 
tional plants  by  the  roots,  to  see  how  they  are  growing  ;  and 
such  is  the  policy  which,  I  trust,  Unionist  free-traders,  whether 
they  are  to  be  treated  as  outcasts  or  allies,  will  do  their  utmost 
to  support,  both  in  Glasgow  and  elsewhere.  (Cheers.)  Finally, 
let  me  beg  the  Unionist  free-traders  not  to  be  discouraged.  I 
cannot  help  thinking  that  the  views  which  they  hold  are  shared 
by  a  much  larger  body  of  their  countrymen  than  would  appear 
at  first  sight  through  the  thick  mist  which  has  been  created 
by  the  careful  manipulation  of  electoral  agencies.  Do  not  let 
us  reject  compromise  if  it  is  offered  to  us  on  fair  terms,  but  let 
us  hold  fast  to  our  essential  principles.  Those  principles  are 
sound,  and  their  soundness  will,  I  believe,  become  more  than 
ever  apparent,  if  ever  an  attempt  is  made  to  give  practical 
effect  to  the  system  now  advocated  by  the  tariff  reformers,  and 
more  especially  by  the  extremists  among  them.  (Cheers.)  It 
will  then  be  found  that  the  feet  of  the  idol  which  they  call  on 
their  countrymen  to  worship  are  made  of  clay.  Therefore,  I  say  to 
any  weak-kneed  brethren  who  are  inclined  to  succumb  to 
pressure  of  the  Athenian  type,  to  which  I  alluded  at  the 
commencement  of  my  remarks,  courage,  and  again,  courage. 
(Loud  cheers.) 

Mr.  St.  Loe  Strachey,  in  proposing  the  toast  of  "  The  Club," 
said  that  free  trade  was  not  a  bloodless  scientific  doctrine,  a 
mere  affair  of  logic  and  statistics.  It  was  the  enemy  of  injustice 
and  monopoly,  and  secured  to  the  poor  man  the  fullest 
remuneration  of  his  toil.  The  arguments  against  protection 
might  be  condensed  into  one  word — k'  waste."  Traced  to  their 
necessary  consequences,  the  results  of  any  of  the  schemes  now 
urged  upon  us  involved  waste  in  some  form  or  other.  We  need 
not  fear  the  competition  of  Germany  for  the  command  of  the 
sea,  even  if  we  were  forced  to  build  whole  navies  of  Dread- 
noughts, provided  we  conserved  our  economic  energies  by  free 
trade,  while  their  opponents  wasted  theirs  by  protection. 


EXERCISE  No.  16. 

Mr.  Churchill,  M.P.,  was  welcomed  by  the  members  of  the 
National  Liberal  Club  on  his  return  to  England  at  a  dinner 
given  at  the  club  on  Saturday  evening.  Lord  Carrington, 
president  of  the  club,  was  in  the  chair,  and  there  were  about 
250  guests,  among  those  present  being  Dr.  Macnamara,  M.P., 
Sir  H.  Cotton,  M.P.,  Sir  G.  Newnes,  M.P.,  Sir  H.  Regnart,  Mr. 
G.  H.  Radford,  M.P.,  Mr.  Berridge,  M.P.,  Mr.  S.  Collins,  M.P., 
Mr.  C.  D.  Rose,  M.P.,  Mr.  G.  A.  Hardy,  M.P.,  Mr.  Phipson 
Beale,  K.C.,  M.P.,  Captain  the  Hon.  FitzRoy  Hemphill,  and  Mr. 
Dudley  Ward,  M.P.,  Dr.  Ginsburg,  Mr.  R.  Steven,  and  Mr. 
Donald  Murray,  secretary. 

The  Chairman,  before  calling  on  Captain  FitzRoy  Hemphill 
to  propose  the  toast  of  the  evening,  referred  to  the  death  of  the 
Attorney -General.  He  said  it  was  as  impossible  to  over- 
estimate the  loss  the  Liberal  party  had  sustained  in  the  sad 
death  of  Sir  John  Lawson  Walton,  the  Attorney-General,  as 
it  was  to  voice  the  sorrow  and  regret  they  all  felt  at  his 
untimely  death,  and  their  sympathy  with  the  dear  ones  he  had 
left  behind.  He  felt  that  he  was  interpreting  the  thoughts 
of  every  gentleman  in  that  room  when  he  so  spoke  of  this 
sad  occurrence.  (Hear,  hear.) 

Captain  Hemphill  proposed  the  toast  of  "  Our  Guest,"  which 
was  received  with  the  greatest  enthusiasm. 

Mr.  Churchill,  in  responding,  also  referred  in  sympathetic 
words  to  the  death  of  the  Attorney -General,  and  said  that  he 
could  not  but  feel  that  it  would  have  been  better  if  their 
meeting  had  been  on  some  other  night  than  that.  As  his 
colleague  in  the  House  of  Commons,  he  would  like  to  say  how 
often,  as  one  of  the  younger  members  of  the  Government, 
having  to  deal  sometimes  at  short  notice  with  difficult  legal  and 
constitutional  questions  arising  out  of  South  African  politics, 
he  had  referred  with  confidence  to  the  Attorney-General's 
advice,  and  he  had  always  found  him  ready,  in  spite  of  the 
onerous  and  arduous  duties  of  his  office,  to  give  him  that  advice 
in  the  most  generous  manner.  The  Attorney-General  would 
be  greatly  missed  by  his  colleagues,  and  he  thought  his  loss 
would  be  felt  by  the  members  of  the  Conservative  party  in  the 
House  of  Commons  who  had  always  found  him  a  courteous 
antagonist.  He  was  quite  sure,  also,  that  there  were  many 
humble  people  in  Leeds  who  would  feel  that  they  had  lost  a 
friend  in  their  political  relationships.  (Hear,  hear.) 


Proceeding,  Mr.  Churchill  said  that  the  invitation  they  had 
sent  to  him  reached  him  on  the  White  Nile  and  gave  him 
the  most  keen  and  lively  pleasure.  He  was  very  grateful  to 
the  National  Liberal  Club,  which  had  always  been  very  kind 
to  him.  He  remembered  that  almost  as  soon  as  he  had  left 
the  Conservative  party,  almost  as  soon  as  he  had  been  driven 
out  of  that  party — (cheers) — the  members  of  that  club  invited 
him  to  a  banquet  and  received  him  in  the  frankest  and  most 
cordial  manner  possible,  giving  him,  at  a  moment  when  he 
greatly  needed  it,  support,  encouragement,  and  help,  and 
enabling  him  to  join  the  Liberal  party  with  some  dignity.  Their 
whole-hearted  welcome  did  a  good  deal  to  relieve  the 
reproach  and  suspicion  which  always  attached,  and  he  thought 
in  many  cases  rightly  attached,  to  political  change.  He  was 
glad  to  think  that,  now  that  he  had  been  two  years  in  the 
collar  as  a  Liberal  Minister  and  as  a  member  of  the  present 
Government,  nothing  had  occurred  to  induce  them  to  regret 
the  countenance  and  the  welcome  which  they  then  gave  him. 
(Cheers.)  It  was,  no  doubt,  a  disadvantage  to  exchange  the 
salubrious  and  cool  breezes  of  Uganda  for  the  hot,  exhausting 
atmosphere  of  the  House  of  Commons.  It  was  a  disadvantage 
to  come  from  the  calm  solemnity  of  the  Great  Lakes  to  the 
storm  in  a  teacup  of  a  Devonshire  election.  (Laughter.)  But  in 
spite  of  those  contrasts,  he  was  very  glad  to  be  safe  home  again, 
to  find  himself  once  again  among  his  friends  and  comrades  of 
the  Liberal  party  ;  and  to  come  again  into  the  fighting  line  of 
controversial  politics.  He  came  back  in  the  best  of  health — 
(cheers) — and,  as  he  frankly  said,  with  every  disposition,  which 
he  thought  most  of  them  shared,  to  force  the  fighting  up  to  the 
closet  possible  terms.  (Cheers.)  He  believed  that  the  Session 
to  which  he  had  come  back  held  out  to  their  party  many 
cheering  prospects.  He  saw  Liberal  principles  pervading  the 
whole  administration  of  the  British  Empire,  steadily  making 
their  way  to  the  most  remote  bounds  of  our  administrative 
organisation.  He  saw  even  their  opponents  forced  to  talk  the 
language  of  the  Liberal  party  and  to  turn  their  attention  to 
those  social  problems  which  they  had  sedulously  pressed  upon 
them.  Before  the  Unionist  party  got  into  power  again  they 
would  have  to  win  the  English  democracy  with  plans  and 
positive  proposals  which  would  actually  benefit  them  in  their 
daily  lives. 

He  did  not  think  the  Government  had  anything  to  regret  since 
they  took  office.  He  saw  each  year  large  landmarks  of  progress 
being  erected.  In  1906  they  accorded  a  charter  to  the 
trade  unions  of  Great  Britain — those  great  social  bulwarks 
which  were  an  indispensable  counterpoise  and  natural  corrective 


of  a  high  competitive  system.  They  accorded  to  them  a  charter 
which  would  be  the  bedrock  of  industrial  arrangements  for  the 
next  20  years.  In  1907  they  set  up  Parliaments  in  the 
Transvaal  and  the  Orange  River  Colony,  the  erection  of  which 
had  meant  that  Boer  and  Briton  had  at  last  laid  aside  their  long 
quarrel  and  set  to  work  to  develop  their  common  country  under 
the  shelter  of  the  Union  Jack.  (Cheers.)  What  were  they 
going  to  do  in  1908  ?  He  thought  if  they  could  fulfil  that  old 
pledge  made  by  those  for  whom  they  had  no  responsibility,  if 
they  could  do  something  to  secure  the  closing  days  of  the 
hard-working,  hard-pressed  men  in  our  country  by  establishing 
some  system  of  old-age  pensions,  which  he  believed  would 
stimulate  and  not  destroy  the  thrift  and  self-respect  without 
which  humanity  would  lose  its  driving  power,  the  year  1 908 
would  not  be  empty,  would  not  have  been  barrenly  expended. 
(Cheers.)  And  if,  in  1909,  they  could  complete  the  series  of 
measures  affecting  the  land  by  a  proper  system  of  taxation  of 
the  values  of  urban  properties  according  to  the  advantages 
reaped  by  their  possessors  from  no  exertions  of  their  own,  and 
if  in  1910  they  could  submit  to  the  country  their  proposals  for 
curbing  once  and  for  all  the  arbitrary  veto  of  the  House  of 
Lords — (cheers) — in  such  a  manner  as  to  secure  the  reasonable, 
but  effective  supremacy  of  the  representative  Chamber  without 
breaking  the  golden  thread  of  English  history  and  without 
departing  from  the  level  road  of  constitutional  evolution,  and  if, 
all  the  time,  they  were  able  to  preserve  free  trade  against  the 
menacing  assaults  of  ignorance  and  claptrap — (cheers) — then,  he 
thought,  they  would  be  found  to  have  gained  the  approbation 
of  their  fellow-countrymen,  and  even  if  they  had  not  gained  it 
he  was  quite  sure  they  would  have  done  one  or  two  big  things 
which  would  stand  in  need  of  no  approbation  from  any  quarter. 

Proceeding  to  speak  of  his  recent  journey,  Mr.  Churchill  said  it 
was  rather  a  doubtful  attempt  of  an  Under- Secretary  to  visit 
the  countries  beyond  the  seas  from  which  he  had  just  returned. 
There  were  precedents,  but  they  were  not  numerous,  and  there 
was  criticism,  and  it  was  not  always  friendly.  He  ventured, 
however,  to  think  that  it  was  a  matter  of  importance, 
particularly  in  the  administration  of  the  Colonial  Office,  that 
those  who  were  responsible  for  taking  a  share,  however  small, 
in  the  large  decisions  of  policy  should  have  first-hand  informa- 
tion, should  have,  at  any  rate  in  regard  to  some  of  the  countries, 
a  realisation  of  the  values  and  the  proportions  of  the  issues 
with  which  they  had  to  deal.  (Hear,  hear.)  There  was  another 
reason.  Parties  came  and  went,  but  we  were  all  working  for 
great  ends,  we  were  all  trying  to  build  up  a  great  nation 


possessed  of  a  great  estate,  and  he  thought  it  important  that 
those  who,  in  distant  countries,  were  called  upon  to  work 
hard  and  live  their  lives  in  bad  climates,  often  under  conditions 
of  great  difficulty  and  often  of  dulness  and  monotony,  should 
feel  that  the  tremendous  transference  which  occurred  in 
January,  1906,  meant,  indeed,  a  great  change  in  the  point  of 
view  from  which  the  British  Empire  was  administered  ;  but  it 
did  not  mean  that  there  was  any  lack  of  sympathy,  of  interest, 
or  of  zeal  to  comprehend  and  study  the  problems  and  the  needs 
of  the  large  possessions  of  the  Crown  beyond  the  seas.  (Cheers.) 
If  they  asked  him  what  was  the  prevailing,  the  predominant 
impression  of  his  journey,  he  would  say  frankly  that  it  was  one 
of  astonishment.  It  was  not  the  first  time  he  had  travelled 
abroad.  He  had  had  an  opportunity  of  examining  Africa  from 
both  ends,  from  the  Sudan  and  from  the  south,  and  he  had 
travelled  widely  in  India  ;  but  he  confessed  that  he  had  never 
seen  countries  so  fertile  and  so  beautiful,  outside  Europe,  as 
those  through  which  he  had  travelled  on  the  journey  from 
which  they  welcomed  him  home.  There  were  parts  of  the  East 
African  Protectorate  which,  in  their  beauty,  in  the  coolness  of 
the  air,  in  the  richness  of  the  soil,  in  their  verdure,  in  the 
abundance  of  running  water,  in  their  fertility,  unquestionably 
surpassed  any  of  the  countries  which  he  had  mentioned,  and 
challenged  comparison  with  the  fairest  regions  in  England, 
France,  or  Italy.  He  had  seen  in  Uganda  a  country  which, 
from  end  to  end,  was  a  garden — inexhaustible,  irrepressible,  and 
exuberant  fertility  upon  every  side — and  he  could  not  doubt 
that  that  extraordinary  system  of  lakes  and  waterways  which 
was  to  be  seen  on  the  map  of  Africa  must  one  day,  as  a  centre 
of  tropical  production,  play  a  most  important  part  in  the 
economic  development  of  the  whole  world.  He  could  not  tell 
them  with  what  pleasure  and  with  what  interest  he  had  moved 
through  these  wide  and  comparatively  unknown  regions,  or 
with  what  feelings,  almost  of  awe,  he  was  able  to  follow  the 
Nile  from  the  point  where  it  flowed,  over  the  rim  of  the 
Victoria  Nyanza,  to  where  nearly  3000  miles  away  it  supported 
the  daily  life  of  the  millions  who  live  in  Egypt.  (Cheers.) 

There  was  a  reverse  to  the  medal.  The  fact  that  the  air  was 
cool  in  East  Africa  ought  not  to  lead  one  to  forget  that  one  was 
on  the  Equator.  The  direct  ray  of  the  sun  struck  down  on  the 
head  of  man  and  beast,  producing  a  sensible  effect  on  all  it 
touched.  The  sensation  that  the  air  was  buoyant  and  bracing 
did  not  alter  the  fact  that  an  altitude  of  five,  six,  or  seven 
thousand  feet  was  a  very  unusual  one  for  a  European  to  live  at ; 
and  the  beauty  of  the  landscape  could  never  remove  the  savage 
beasts,  noxious  insects,  and  dangerous  diseases  which  confronted 


the  settler  or  the  pioneer.  It  would  be  a  mistake  to  attempt 
by  artificial  means  to  augment  emigration  to  these  countries. 
The  best  way  to  allow  their  populations  to  develop  was  to 
make  a  success  of  the  people  who  were  there  already,  and  to 
let  the  success  of  these  people  encourage  others  naturally  and 
economically  to  follow  their  example  and  imitate  their  fortunes. 
(Cheers.)  It  was  not  proved  that  the  white  man  could  live  for 
ten  or  twelve  years  even  in  the  best  parts  of  Equatorial  Africa 
without  some  nervous  or  physical  degeneration  :  still  less  was 
it  proved  that  he  could  rear  children  and  maintain  his  species 
for  several  generations  without  sensible  deterioration  ;  and  until 
that  was  proved,  the  destiny,  the  ultimate  form  of  develop- 
ment— he  did  not  say  the  value,  for  that  was  beyond  dispute — 
of  these  countries  must  remain  a  matter  of  considerable 
uncertainty.  Still,  many  of  the  difficulties  now  pressing  upon 
those  who  lived  in  that  land  would  be  removed  by  the  continued 
application  of  modern  science  and  by  the  continued  develop- 
ment of  communications  and  civilised  apparatus  generally. 
(Hear,  hear.) 

The  development  of  the  country  should  be  persevered  in 
without  flagging.  From  a  mere  financial  point  of  view  we 
ought  not  to  waste  our  money  on  a  concern  we  were  not  going 
to  make  a  success  of.  The  sums  we  spent  on  our  African 
possessions  and  protectorates  through  grants  in  aid  were  and 
would  continue  to  be  large  until  they  were  raised  to  an 
economic  level.  Many  of  these  possessions,  in  a  short  time, 
would  be  self-supporting  and  would  aid  in  the  development  of 
the  countries  immediately  around  them.  But  he  said  frankly 
that  there  would  need  to  be  capital  expended,  especially  on 
the  essential  communications  of  the  country,  before  we  should 
be  relieved  of  the  unpleasant  necessity  of  making  these 
provisions  in  our  annual  Budgets.  We  must  bear  in  mind 
about  these  protectorates  on  the  east  and  west  side  of  Africa, 
which  we  had  acquired  with  so  little  struggle  or  effort,  that 
they  would  increasingly  supply  the  working  population  of  this 
country  with  the  raw  materials  so  indispensable  to  their  great 
industries.  Cotton,  rubber,  fibre,  hemp,  and  many  other 
commodities  would  come  in  in  an  increasing  stream.  In 
regard  to  cotton  especially,  he  believed  that  our  dependence 
on  a  single  source  of  supply  had  in  many  cases  enabled 
unhealthy  speculation  to  force  up  the  price  of  raw  material  to 
an  excessive  level  and  to  levy  a  heavy  toll  on  the  industries  of 
the  hardworking  population  in  the  great  Palatinate  of  Lancaster. 
But  the  most  important  reason  which  he  submitted  to  all 
Liberals  for  not  relaxing  our  efforts  in  the  countries  for  which 
we  were  responsible  was  the  interest  of  the  native  races  who 


dwelt  there.  From  time  to  time  in  the  administration  of  large 
affairs  detached  incidents  occurred  which  everybody  regretted 
and  which  scarcely  anybody  defended  ;  but  he  was  most 
pleasantly  impressed  with  the  manner  in  which  a  great  number 
of  our  civil  and  military  officers  whom  he  met  out  there 
construed  their  duty  towards  the  native  populations  among 
whom  they  lived.  He  found  them  resolved  to  protect  these 
populations  against  the  mere  exploiter  and  the  speculator  and 
those  who  only  wished  to  use  them  for  some  financial 
advantage.  (Cheers.)  It  would  be  an  evil  day  for  the  popula- 
tions of  East  Africa  and  of  Uganda  if  they  were  handed  over 
from  the  careful  and  disinterested  control  of  British  Imperial 
officials  to  the  hard  self-interest  of  some  small  local  community. 
(Hear,  hear.) 

The  most  attractive  and  the  most  interesting  spectacle  which 
he  witnessed  was  the  native  State  of  Uganda.  Mr.  Hemphill' 
had  referred  to  peoples  whom  it  was  difficult  to  supply  with 
gloves  until  they  had  been  provided  with  other  even  more 
indispensable  articles  of  sartorial  adornment.  (A  laugh.)  No 
greater  contrast  could  be  experienced  than  the  spectacle  of 
Uganda  after  one  travelled  slowly  through  the  East  African 
Protectorate  for  hundreds  of  miles,  meeting  native  savages 
whose  method  of  showing  you  honour  was  to  paint  their  skins 
in  every  colour  under  the  sun,  and  deck  their  heads  with 
feathers  and  their  bodies  with  shells,  and  dance  to  a  monotonous 
hopping  dirge  around  the  chair  in  which  the  visitor  took  his 
seat.  (Laughter.)  Once  in  Uganda  you  went  into  another 
world.  You  found  there  a  completely  established  polity — a 
State  with  every  one  in  his  place  and  a  place  for  every  one. 
You  found  clothed,  cultivated,  educated  natives.  You  found 
200,000  who  could  read  and  write,  a  very  great  number  who 
had  embraced  the  Christian  faith  sincerely  and  had  abandoned 
polygamy  in  consequence  of  their  conversion.  You  found,  in 
short,  in  Uganda  almost  everything  which  went  to  vindicate 
the  ideal  which  the  negrophile  had  so  often  held  up  before  the 
British  public  and  before  the  House  of  Commons,  and  in  regard 
to  which  he  had  so  often  in  other  places  been  disappointed  by 
the  hard  logic  of  facts  and  the  disappointing  trend  of  concrete 
and  material  events.  We  owed  a  great  deal  in  Uganda  to  the 
development,  on,  he  thought,  an  unequal  scale,  of  missionary 
enterprise.  (Cheers.)  In  some  other  parts  of  the  British 
Empire  he  had  found  the  official  classes  distrustful  of 
missionary  enterprise.  In  Uganda  he  found  them  very 
grateful.  Devoted  Christian  men  of  different  Churches  but 
of  a  common  charity  had  laboured  earnestly  and  strenuously, 
year  in,  year  out,  to  raise  the  moral  and  spiritual  conceptions 
P.W.  R 


of  one  of  the  most  intelligent  races  in  the  whole  of  the  African 
continent,  and  they  had  succeeded  undoubtedly  in  introducing 
a  character  of  progress  and  decorum  into  the  life  of  Uganda 
which  made  that  State  one  of  the  most  interesting  of  those  for 
which  the  British  public  had  ever  become  directly  or  indirectly 
responsible.  (Cheers.) 

It  was  a  very  sad  thing  that  this  race,  which  had  made  such 
rapid  progress  and  which  showed  itself  so  susceptible  of  assimilat- 
ing and  so  willing  to  assimilate  the  good  things  we  had  it  in 
our  power  to  teach,  should  have  been  preyed  upon,  at  a  time 
which  synchronised  with  our  arrival  in  the  country,  by  so 
terrible  a  scourge  as  sleeping  sickness.  He  hoped  most 
earnestly  that  the  administrative  measures  which  had  been 
taken  would  enable  us  to  reduce  the  mortality,  or  at  any  rate  to 
check  the  spread  of  that  fell  disease.  In  protecting  a  race  so 
•amiable  and  so  capable  of  progress  from  this  terrible  destruction 
science  and  civilisation  had  a  mission  to  fulfil,  which  no  man, 
whatever  view  he  took  of  politics,  could  possibly  challenge  or 
impugn.  (Cheers.) 

One  other  subject  on  which  he  would  touch  was  one  of 
gravity  and  delicacy.  They  had  all  been  concerned  at  the 
position  and  the  situation  of  the  British  Indians  in  South 
Africa.  It  was  possible  that  there  would  be  a  debate  on  that 
subject  when  Parliament  assembled,  and  it  would  only  be 
respectful  to  reserve  the  full  argument  which  he  wished  to  use 
until  he  was  called  upon  to  give  it  from  his  place  in  the  House 
of  Commons.  All  he  would  say  that  night  was  that,  while  he 
yielded  to  no  man  in  his  admiration  for  the  Indian  Empire  and 
in  his  respect  for  the  people  of  Hindustan,  he  could  not  himself 
dispute  the  right  of  General  Botha's  Government  in  the 
Transvaal  to  make  what  arrangements  they  might  think 
necessary  to  the  welfare  of  their  own  people  in  respect  to 
immigration  from  Asia.  (Cheers.)  He  could  not  dispute 
their  right  any  more  than  he  could  dispute  the  right  of  the 
people  of  Australia.  It  was  entirely  within  the  authority 
deliberately  conceded  to  them  by  this  House  of  Commons,  from 
which  such  great  advantages  had  flowed  in  other  ways,  which 
they  all  recognised  and  for  which  they  were  all  thankful.  He 
hoped  that  in  any  discussion  which  might  take  place  before 
Parliament  assembled,  or  in  that  which  took  place  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  on  a  subject  upon  which  the  white  population  of 
South  Africa  were  absolutely  united  and  which  affected  their 
most  vital  and  intimate  interests,  there  would  be  an  honest 
attempt  made  by  those  who  took  part  to  grasp  the  colonists' 
point  of  view,  to  understand  their  difficulties,  and  above  all  to 
avoid  the  use  of  harsh  or  iptemperate  language,  which  would 


only  have  the  effect  of  weakening  that  moderating  and  con- 
ciliatory influence  which  the  Colonial  Office  would  not  cease  to 
exert  by  every  one  of  the  various  channels  open  to  it.  (Cheers.) 
The  approach  of  this  difficulty  had  not  been  unexpected.  There 
were  some  present  who  would  remember  that  he  told  his  right 
hon.  friend  Sir  C.  Dilke,  when  he  brought  a  deputation  to  him 
before  he  started  on  his  travels,  that  he  would  make  it  a  matter 
particularly  to  be  considered  whether  the  Equatorial  Pro- 
tectorates of  Africa  could  not  in  some  manner,  or  in  some 
degree,  be  made  to  supply  a  compensating  field  for  the 
colonising  enterprise  of  our  British  subjects  in  India.  (Hear, 
hear.)  After  all,  the  East  African  Protectorate  and  Uganda 
were  the  countries  nearest  to  India.  They  were  opposite  to 
India.  The  Uganda  railway  was  built  by  Indian  labour.  Sikh 
soldiers  at  present  maintained  the  authority  of  the  Crown 
throughout  Uganda.  (Cheers.)  Indian  traders  had  been  for 
generations  intimately  associated  with  the  whole  development 
of  East  African  territory,  and  were  at  this  moment  indispensable 
to  the  cheap  and  convenient  development  of  trade  and  of 
communication  throughout  very  large  areas  indeed.  The 
Government  welcomed  their  entry  into  the  country.  Their 
rights  were  fully  safeguarded,  and  official  employment  in 
many  cases  of  a  responsible  character  had  been,  and  would 
continue  to  be,  open  to  Indians  of  intelligence  and  of  praise- 
worthy character.  In  view,  however,  of  the  fact,  which  every 
one  must  recognise,  that  the  two  races,  Asiatic  and  European, 
did  not  mix  well  on  the  even  terms  of  trade  competition  and 
social  life,  and  in  view  of  the  strong  feeling  which  was 
expressed  vehemently  to  him  and  to  others  by  white  settlers 
who  had  already  arrived  in  the  country,  it  would  be  our  duty 
to  reserve  certain  areas  where  the  coolness  of  the  air  and 
the  elevation  of  the  land  made  life  particularly  suitable  for  the 
British  and  European  settlers.  We  were  also  bound  to  consider 
the  rights  of  the  aboriginal  natives,  who  were  the  first  possessors 
of  the  country  and  who  had  sometimes  been  injuriously  affected 
by  Indian  influences  which  had  reached  them  from  the  other 
side  of  the  water.  But  when  all  that  had  been  said  and  disposed 
of  there  was  room  enough  in  those  splendid  lands  for  all. 
There  were  enormous  areas  of  fertile  and  beautiful  country  in 
which  Asiatics  could  live  and  thrive  and  multiply,  and  which  in 
a  very  short  time  could  be  opened,  if  they  were  not  already 
opened,  to  the  enterprise  of  colonists  from  India.  If  that  policy 
could  be  carried  out,  and  in  proportion  as  it  was  given  effect 
to,  we  should  witness  in  the  circle  of  the  British  Empire  the 
arrival,  not  of  a  daughter  State,  but  of  a  granddaughter  State, 
a  State  which  was  the  outcome  of  a  dependency,  and  we  should 


by  that  means  relieve  the  tension  which  existed  in  South  Africa, 
and  remove  the  misunderstandings  which,  he  feared,  might 
have  been  growing  in  our  Indian  Empire,  by  affording  the 
necessary  and  natural  outlet  for  the  colonising  genius  and  the 
commercial  enterprise  of  the  native  of  India.  (Cheers.) 

In  conclusion,  Mr.  Churchill  said  he  trusted  that  they  would 
not  think,  because  he  had  been  talking  of  departmental  affairs 
that  he  wished  to  divert  the  attention  of  the  British  electorate 
from  the  grave  problems  of  social  reforms  which  confronted 
them  at  home.  A  just  sense  of  proportion  would  easily  convince 
any  one  who  thought  or  cared  to  think  that  the  fame  and  pro- 
sperity of  our  people  could  be  won  and  preserved  only  by  main- 
taining the  spirit  and  stamina  of  those  who  dwelt  here  in  our 
own  islands.  To  preserve  the  British  Empire,  to  gild  it  with 
the  rays  of  true  glory,  there  must  be  an  Imperial  people.  The 
burden  could  never  be  borne  on  the  shoulders  of  stunted 
millions  crowded  into  the  slums  of  cities,  trampled  into  the 
slush  of  streets.  But  all  legitimate  interests  were  in  harmony, 
and  a  Liberal  Government  would  be  actually  stronger  for  the 
purposes  of  social  reform  if  it  showed  itself  alive  to  the  tips  of 
its  fingers.  To  command  the  confidence  of  the  varied  and 
powerful  forces  which  formed  and  constituted  British  public 
opinion  it  was  necessary  that  an  Administration  should  show 
itself  capable  of  wisdom  and  constructive  energy  in  every  one 
of  the  immense  departments  of  the  State.  Liberalism  com- 
prised two  ideas — sympathy  and  hope.  To  this  Radicalism 
added  one  word — "thorough."  Guided  by  those  three,  they 
might  advance  with  courage  to  the  realisation  of  a  British 
Empire  which  would  not  be  the  hobby  of  the  leisured  classes,  or 
a  weapon  of  party  warfare,  or  the  profitable  occupation  of  a 
few,  but  a  field  of  action  and  responsibility  in  which  every 
citizen  might  find  opportunities  of  serving  great  causes,  and 
might  sometimes  feel  that  he  had  served  them  well.  (Loud 

EXERCISE  No.   17. 

By  the  consent  of  all  those  who  have  witnessed  every  State 
procession  from  Buckingham  Palace  since  King  Edward, 
reviving  the  custom  of  the  earlier  years  of  his  great  mother  and 
a  practice  of  preceding  monarchs  also,  opened  the  first  Parlia- 
ment of  his  reign  in  person,  the  open  air  ceremonial  of  yesterday 


was  incomparably  the  most  successful  of  its  kind  that  has  yet 
been  seen.  Moreover,  this  was  the  case  not  only  when  the 
procession  was  on  its  outward  way,  but  when  it  returned  also ; 
and  because  this  was  so — because,  although  the  outdoor  pageant 
is  but  the  preliminary  or  prelude  to  the  more  imposing 
ceremony  in  the  House  of  Lords,  it  is  for  the  people  outside 
essentially  a  separate  pageant — it  is  well  on  this  occasion  that 
an  attempt  to  reproduce  an  impression  of  it  should  be  made  all 
in  one  piece,  so  to  speak.  For  the  memory  which  remains  with 
me,  and  with  thousands  of  others  besides,  is  essentially  of  one 
not  very  long  and  entirely  delightful  experience.  Happily,  full 
programmes  of  the  things  planned  to  occur,  of  the  order  of 
carriages  and  their  occupants,  of  the  military  arrangements, 
and  the  like,  have  already  been  published  ;  so  that  I  am  free  to 
devote  the  brief  space  at  my  disposal  to  a  description  of  the 
crowd  which  saw  and  heard,  to  the  conditions  under  which  it 
used  eyes  and  ears  and  voice,  and  to  the  things  seen  and  heard 
as  they  impressed  one  unit  in  that  crowd. 

By  a  little  after  1  o'clock,  the  troops  and  police  being  already 
in  position,  the  broad  margins  of  the  route  of  the  procession 
along  the  Mall  began  to  be  lined  with  patient  spectators,  who 
had  plenty  to  look  at  as  the  State  carriages  of  noblemen  drove 
through  from  time  to  time  in  the  direction  of  Westminster,  as 
Life  Guardsmen  moved  past  with  a  genuinely  strong  sun 
glancing  from  their  cuirasses,  and  as  the  crowd  itself  thickened. 
Soon  that  crowd  began  to  be  extraordinarily  interesting,  partly 
by  virtue  of  its  volume — it  was  incomparably  the  largest  crowd 
collected  in  St.  James's  Park  during  recent  years — partly  by 
reason  of  its  constitution.  It  contained  representatives  of  every 
rank  of  society,  peers  and  commoners,  officers  of  the  Navy  and 
of  the  Army,  Bishops  and  other  clergy,  innumerable  ladies, 
foreigners  of  European  extraction,  many  coloured  spectators 
who  might  or  might  not  be  subjects  of  the  King.  It  was,  in 
short,  a  very  memorable  collection  of  persons  assembled  to  see 
the  King  and  Queen  and,  incidentally,  the  Prince  and  Princess 
of  Wales  also,  and  to  do  them  honour.  The  minutes  crept  on  ; 
and,  precisely  at  20  minutes  to  2,  the  music  of  the  bands  within 
the  Palace  was  heard,  the  Life  Guardsmen  were  seen  to  be  in 
motion,  and  the  State  carriages,  five  in  all,  composing  the 
preliminary  part  of  the  procession  began  to  move  slowly 
towards  the  Horse  Guards.  They  passed  in  silence,  for  the 
crowd  was  waiting  for  the  State  carriage  of  the  King  and 

§ueen  ;    and,  for  that  reason,  it  was  most  dense  of  all  near 
uckingham  Palace,  and  the  Prince  and  Princess  of  Wales,  who 
went  from  Marlborough  House  in  advance,  were  less  noticed 
than  on  ordinary  occasions. 


But,  when  at  last  the  gorgeous  and  really,  in  its  way,  very 
beautiful  State  coach  appeared,  when  King  and  Queen  could  be 
plainly  distinguished  through  its  glass  sides,  the  King  in  his 
Field-Marshal's  full  dress,  the  Queen  wearing  a  small  crown, 
and  bowing,  the  King  saluting  repeatedly,  there  was  a  perfect 
storm  of  cheers  and  applause.  Cheers  and  lifted  hats  and 
waving  handkerchiefs  all  the  way — that  is  the  story  of  the 
procession  from  Buckingham  Palace  to  the  Horse  Guards,  and 
froon  the  Horse  Guards  to  Westminster.  The  prettiest  and 
most  affecting  parts  of  it — for  it  is  affecting  to  see  and  to  hear 
such  a  display  of  loyalty— -were  as  the  procession  passed  the 
steps  at  the  Duke  of  York's  column,  which  were  absolutely 
crammed,  and,  when  it  could  be  seen,  the  State  coach  just  about 
to  pass  under  the  archway  of  the  Horse  Guards,  for  there,  as  of 
course,  there  was  room  for  an  enormous  concourse  of  people, 
and  that  room  was  all  occupied.  So  to  the  House  of  Lords. 

The  Throne  in  the  House  of  Lords  was  divested  of  the 
draperies  which  usually  cover  it  and  its  two  chairs  stood 
revealed,  carved,  gilded,  and  studded  with  crystals,  on  the 
canopied  dais  of  crimson  and  gold.  This  was  the  most  con- 
spicuous feature  of  the  beautiful  Chamber,  as  the  peers  and 
peeresses,  the  Judges,  and  the  representatives  of  foreign  nations 
assembled.  The  two  seats  of  the  Throne  are  exactly  alike  in 
design  and  ornamentation,  but  the  one  on  the  right  which  the 
King  occupies  is  slightly  higher  than  that  of  the  Queen  Consort. 
The  Throne  of  England  is  often  spoken  of  constitutionally,  and 
in  the  historic  sense,  denoting  the  sovereign  power  and  dignity 
of  the  land.  If  there  be  a  material  Throne  at  all  it  is  surely 
this  imposing  structure  in  the  Lords,  where  the  King  sits, 
surrounded  by  his  officers  of  State  and  constitutional  advisers,  and 
declares  the  purposes  for  which  he  has  called  Parliament  together. 

For  this  great  ceremony,  appointed  for  2  o'clock,  the  Chamber 
was  opened  at  noon.  The  earliest  to  come  were  peeresses. 
Eager  to  be  in  time  or  to  get  good  seats,  many  of  them  arrived 
shortly  after  12  o'clock.  But  their  places  evidently  were 
allotted  by  precedence,  according  to  rank.  As  they  came  in 
singly,  or  in  twos  or  threes,  the  long  trains  of  their  Court 
dresses  sweeping  over  the  green  carpet,  each  lady  gave  a  card  to 
one  of  the  group  of  attendants,  under  the  Master  of  the 
Ceremonies,  and  was  by  him  shown  to  her  seat.  On  special 
benches  nearest  to  the  Throne,  on  the  left,  were  the  duchesses. 
The  marchionesses,  the  countesses,  the  viscountesses,  and  the 
baronesses  had  each  also  their  particular  benches  on  the  floor. 
In  the  placing  of  peers,  however,  the  distinctions  of  rank  were 
ignored,  save  with  respect  to  the  highest  order  of  the  peerage  ; 
and,  as  is  customary  on  ceremonial  occasions,  the  usual  political 


division  of  the  House, 'into  Ministerialists  to  the  right  of  the 
Throne  and  the  Opposition  to  the  left,  was  discarded.  The 
dukes  had  a  bench  on  the  left,  close  to  the  Throne  and 
immediately  below  the  duchesses.  In  the  case  of  all  the  other 
ranks  of  the  peerage,  those  who  came  early  sat  where  they 
pleased  in  the  front,  and  the  late  comers,  as  the  Chamber  became 
crowded,  sat  where  they  could  find  room  towards  the  bar. 

There  was  the  usual  display  of  beautiful  draperies  and  jewels 
by  the  peeresses.  In  the  tints  of  the  dresses  were  seen  soft  and 
delicate  yellows,  pinks,  mauves,  and  greys  ;  and  here  and  there 
decided  blacks,  greens,  and  blues.  But  the  prevailing  colour 
was  white — beautiful  white  lace  on  the  corsage  and  white 
plumes  in  the  hair.  The  peers  wore  their  heavy  scarlet  robes 
and  encumbering  collars  of  ermine.  Indeed,  in  'the  scheme  of 
colour  scarlet  and  white  were  in  excess.  The  spiritual  peers, 
sitting  to  the  right  of  the  Throne  opposite  the  dukes — the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  and  the  Archbishop  of  York  con- 
spicuous in  their  midst — wore  not  the  black  satin  gowns  with 
lawn  sleeves  in  which  they  are  seen  at  the  ordinary  sittings  of 
the  House,  but  scarlet  robes  and  ermine  capes  hanging  halfway 
down  the  back.  The  Judges  of  the  High  Court,  .gathered 
together  at  the  foot  of  the  Throne  between  the  dukes  and  the 
Bishops,  also  contributed  to  the  prevailing  colours.  The  Lords 
Justices  of  Appeal  were  in  black  and  gold,  but  the  more 
numerous  Judges  were  in  scarlet  and  white.  The  one  corner  of 
the  Chamber  which  stood  out  distinctly  and  apart  as  regards 
colour  was  the  temporarily  erected  stand  behind  the  Bishops, 
where  the  Ambassadors  and  Ministers  of  foreign  Powers  were 
assembled.  The  uniforms  of  the  diplomatists  were  as  divergent 
in  character  as  the  races  they  represent.  If  they  vied  with  the 
peeresses  in  their  colours  and  their  stars,  they  exceeded  them  in 
their  early  appearance  on  the  scene.  It  is  perhaps  characteristic 
of  diplomatists  that  they  should  be  soon  on  the  spot.  At  any 
rate  they  were  all  in  their  places  long  before  the  appointed 
time — indeed,  an  hour  before  the  King  was  due,  and  when  few 
of  the  peers  were  yet  present. 

The  following  is  the  official  list  of  the  peeresses  and  Judges 
who  were  present : — 

DUCHESSES. — Somerset,  Westminster. 

MARCHIONESSES. — Townshend,  Hertford,  Bute,  Downshire, 
Dowager  Donegall,  Sligo,  Bristol. 

COUNTESSES.— Erroll,  Eglinton  and  Winton,  Dowager  Mar 
and  Kellie,  Kinnoull,  Dysart,  Dundonald,  Hardwicke,  Dowager 
Bathurst,  Malmesbury,  Bessborough,  Dowager  Arran,  Kingston, 
Annesley,  Erne,  Caledon,  Chichester,  Orford,  Beauchamp,  Strad- 
broke,  Amherst,  Kimberley,  Ancaster. 


VISCOUNTESSES. — Dowager  Torrington,  Clifden,  Dowager  Gort, 
Hill,  Esher,  Goschen,  Ridley,  Iveagh,  St.  Aldwyn. 

BARONESSES. — Darcy  de  Knayth  and  Conyers,  St.  John  of 
Bletsoe,  Saye  and  Sele,  Dormer,  Borthwick,  Elibank,  Belhaven 
and  Stenton,  Bagot,  Berwick,  Dowager  Inchiquin,  Inchiquin, 
Newborough,  Eossmore,  Ellenborough,  Garvagh,  Dowager 
Heytesbury,  Denman,  Oranmore  and  Browne,  Stanley  of 
Alderley,  Leigh,  Dowager  Vivian,  De  Freyne,  St.  Leonards, 
Dowager  Raglan,  Dowager  Coleridge,  Brabourne,  Ampthill, 
Hindlip,  Savile,  Dowager  Hood  of  Avalon,  Dowager  Rookwood, 
Dowager  Knightley,  Llangattock,  Playfair,  Dowager  Inverclyde, 
Inverclyde,  Glanusk,  Dorchester,  Shuttle  worth,  Ritchie  of  Dun- 
dee, Northcliffe,  Michelham,  Desborough,  Loreburn,  Weardale, 
Haversham,  Pirrie,  Allendale,  Collins,  Swaythling. 

JUDGES. — The  Master  of  the  Rolls,  the  President  of  the 
Probate  Division,  Lord  Justice  Moulton,  Lord  Justice  Buckley, 
Lord  Justice  Kennedy,  Mr.  Justice  Darling,  Mr.  Justice  Joyce, 
Mr.  Justice  Jelf,  Mr.  Justice  Eady,  Mr.  Justice  Warrington, 
Mr.  Justice  Deane,  Mr.  Justice  Parker,  Mr.  Justice  Pickford. 

Close  on  2  o'clock  the  Prince  and  Princess  of  Wales  came. 
The  assembly  rose  in  greeting  as  their  Royal  Highnesses  took 
their  seats  on  low  chairs  beside  the  Throne.  The  Prince,  sitting 
on  the  right,  wore  the  robes  of  a  duke  with  four  bars  of  ermine. 
The  Princess,  on  the  left,  was  dressed  in  pale  blue  satin.  A 
soft  dim  light  prevailed.  Suddenly  the  many  electroliers 
dependent  from  the  groined  and  decorated  ceiling  were  turned 
on.  At  the  same  moment  the  Royal  procession  appeared  ;  the 
subdued  hum  of  conversation  was  stilled  ;  and  the  assembly 
stood  up  with  a  rustle  of  silks  and  robes. 

The  pursuivants  and  heralds  came  in  their  tabards,  followed 
by  officers  of  the  Household,  in  various  uniforms,  and  Ministers 
who  are  peers  in  their  robes.  Then  entered  the  King,  leading 
the  Queen  by  the  hand.  The  King  was  arrayed  in  a  wide 
flowing  robe  of  crimson  velvet,  edged  with  gold  lace,  and  a 
long  mantle  of  ermine.  His  Majesty  was  bareheaded.  In  his 
left  hand  he  carried  the  white-plumed  hat  of  a  Field-Marshal. 
The  robe  of  the  Queen  was  crimson  and  white  also,  but  not  so 
ample  and  flowing  as  that  of  the  King.  Standing  before  the 
Throne,  their  Majesties  bowed  to  it,  and  still  hand  in  hand 
ascended  the  few  steps  to  the  dais,  their  long  trains  being  held 
up  by  young  Pages  of  Honour  in  scarlet  doublets  and  white 
knee  breeches.  The  King  stood  on  the  dais  till  the  Queen  was 
seated,  and  one  of  the  Gentlemen  in  Waiting  brought  her  a 
footstool,  and  adjusted  her  robe  around  the  Chair.  The  King 
then  bowed  to  the  assembly  and  took  his  seat.  The  long  train 
of  his  robe  was  spread  down  the  steps  of  the  dais  by  the 


Gentleman  Usher  to  the  Eobes,  in  whom  a  familiar  figure  in 
the  Commons,  Mr.  Erskine,  the  Sergeant-at-Arms,  was  recog- 
nised. Throwing  back  his  robe,  his  Majesty  disclosed  the 
scarlet  of  a  Field-Marshal's  uniform,  crossed  by  the  bright  blue 
ribbon  of  the  Order  of  the  Garter.  The  Queen  wore  a  dark 
dress.  The  gold  and  jewelled  insignia  of  many  Orders  sparkled 
on  her  corsage,  and  from  her  neck  hung  a  long  string  of  pearls. 
"  My  lords,  pray  be  seated,"  said  the  King.  At  the  command 
of  the  King  the  assembly  resumed  their  seats  ;  and  the  disposi- 
tion of  distinguished  personages  around  the  Throne  could  be 
observed.  The  Lord  Chancellor,  wearing  the  robes  of  a  baron, 
with  his  large  grey  wig,  stood  immediately  to  the  right  of  the 
King,  behind  the  Prince  of  Wales.  Close  at  hand  was  the  Lord 
President  of  the  Council  (Lord  Crewe)  with  the  Imperial 
Crown — arches  of  gold,  encrusted  with  diamonds,  enclosing  a 
purple  cap — on  a  velvet  cushion ;  and  Lord  Winchester,  carrying 
on  top  of  a  short  staff  the  Cap  of  Maintenance,  made  of  crimson 
velvet  upturned  with  ermine.  At  the  foot  of  the  Throne  stood 
the  Duke  of  Norfolk  as  Earl  Marshal.  At  the  other  side, 
standing  on  the  dais  beside  the  Queen,  was  the  conspicuous 
figure  of  Lord  Carrington,  President  of  the  Board  of  Agri- 
culture, holding  aloft  the  huge  Sword  of  State,  in  its  crimson 
velvet  case.  Beneath  him,  on  the  steps  of  the  Throne,  was  the 
Lord  Great  Chamberlain  (Lord  Cholmondeley)  with  his  right 
arm  in  a  sling,  the  result  of  his  recent  accident  in  the  hunting- 
field.  At  a  nod  from  the  King,  the  Lord  Great  Chamberlain 
despatched  Black  Eod,  Admiral  Sir  Henry  Stephenson,  who 
wore  his  naval  uniform,  to  summon  "the  faithful  Commons." 
Then  a  few  minutes  of  silence  intervened.  So  deep  was  the 
hush  that  Big  Ben,  sounding  the  quarter-past  2  o'clock,  could 
be  heard  distinctly.  A  subdued  rush  and  rustle  was  heard  at 
the  lower  entrance  to  the  Chamber,  and  Mr.  Speaker,  accom- 
panied by  the  Deputy  Sergeant-at-Arms  and  the  Chaplain,  and 
followed  by  several  Ministers  and  other  Commoners,  was 
conducted  to  the  bar  by  Black  Eod.  The  Speaker  made  a  low 
obeisance  to  the  King.  The  full  assembly  for  the  opening  of 
Parliament  was  now  completed.  The  King  was  on  the  Throne 
before  the  three  Estates  of  the  Eealm — the  Peers,  spiritual  and 
temporal,  and  the  Commons.  Yet  the  impression  conveyed  by 
a  look  round  the  Chamber  at  this  moment  was  that  it  was  an 
assemblage  rather  of  gracious  ladies  than  of  the  grave  and 
reverend  legislators  of  the  land.  The  two  conspicuous  side 
galleries  were  crowded  with  ladies,  immediate  friends  of  the 
King  and  Queen,  as  well  as  daughters  of  peers.  On  the  floor 
the  best  and  most  prominent  positions  nearest  to  the  Throne 
were  also  occupied  by  ladies.  The  main  body  of  the  peers  were 


crowded  at  the  end  of  the  Chamber,  and  most  of  the  Commoners 
were  gathered  under  the  shadows  of  the  galleries  over  the  bar. 

There  was  a  movement  among  the  crowd  of  notables  around 
the  Throne.  The  Lord  Chancellor  emerged  from  the  throng 
and,  kneeling  in  front  of  the  King,  presented  his  Majesty  with 
a  printed  document.  It  was  the  Speech  from  the  Throne.  His 
Majesty,  putting  on  his  white  plumed  hat  and  remaining  seated, 
then  read  the  causes  for  the  calling  of  Parliament  together. 
The  long  list  of  promised  measures  was  followed  with  intense 
interest.  "Your  labours  upon  these  and  upon  all  other 
matters,"  said  the  King  in  a  solemn  concluding  passage,  "  I 
humbly  commend  to  the  blessing  of  Almighty  God." 

The  ceremony  was  over.  The  Speaker  and  the  Commoners 
left  the  bar.  The  King,  rising,  took  off  his  hat  and,  giving  his 
hand  to  the  Queen,  descended  the  steps  of  the  Throne  and 
passed  out  of  the  Chamber,  followed  by  the  Prince  and  Princess 
of  Wales.  The  brilliant  company  then  quickly  dispersed  amid 
animated  conversation  and  merry  laughter.  The  ceremonial 
proceedings  occupied  but  a  very  short  time.  By  half-past  2 
o'clock,  in  fact,  the  House  of  Lords  was  deserted. 

In  the  interval  the  crowds  did  not,  as  has  been  usual, 
disperse ;  did  not  even  grow  perceptibly  thinner.  On  the 
contrary,  they  moved  about,  clustered  round  the  railings  behind 
A.  Battery  of  Royal  Horse  Artillery  as  it  fired  the  salute,  and 
waited  patiently  for  the  return  of  the  procession.  When  that 
came  the  beauty  of  the  day  had  gone  somewhat,  but  the 
enthusiasm  of  the  people  had  not  faded  at  all ;  and  as,  a  few 
minutes  before  3,  the  King  and  Queen  re-entered  Buckingham 
Palace,  the  crowd  was  larger,  its  applause  was  therefore 
naturally  louder  and  more  demonstrative,  than  it  has  been  at 
the  same  place  on  any  similar  occasion  during  King  Edward's 

EXERCISE   No.    18. 


The   Lord   Chancellor  took  his  seat  on   the  woolsack  at  a 
quarter  past  four  o'clock. 


The  Earl  of  Mayo  rose  to  call  attention  to  the  affairs  of  the 
Congo  Free  State  and  to  move  for  papers.    The  papers  he  asked 


for,  he  said,  were  the  same  as  those  he  asked  for  last  Session — 
namely,  copies  of  titles  granted  to  monopolists  and  any  informa- 
tion as  to  their  power  to  force  the  natives  in  the  Congo  to 
labour.  Misrule  in  the  Congo  had  been  the  theme  of  many 
essays,  newspaper  articles,  and  debates  in  both  Houses  of 
Parliament,  and  at  hundreds  of  meetings  in  the  country, 
culminating  in  the  huge  meeting  on  Friday  last  at  the  Queen's 
Hall.  Owing  to  the  pressure  of  public  opinion  in  England,  our 
Government  had  invited  the  Belgian  Government  to  annex  the 
Congo.  The  Belgian  Press  had  suggested  that  we  wished  to 
interfere,  not  for  the  sake  of  the  natives,  but  because  we  wanted 
the  Congo  for  ourselves  ;  in  fact,  they  had  looked  on  our  action 
as  an  unfriendly  interference  in  the  domestic  affairs  of  Belgium. 
But  this  was  an  international  question.  The  Belgian  public 
knew  nothing  about  the  Congo,  and  he  did  not  think  they  cared 
to  know.  When  the  Commission  appointed  by  King  Leopold 
confirmed  all  the  abuses,  scarcely  any  notice  of  the  report  was 
taken  in  Belgium.  There  were,  however,  politicians  in  that 
country  better  able  to  judge  in  this  matter  than  the  mass  of  the 
people,  and  they  had  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  only  way 
of  putting  an  end  to  the  Colonial  autocracy  of  King  Leopold 
was  for  Belgium  to  annex  the  Congo  State.  Negotiations  had 
taken  place  between  King  Leopold  and  his  Ministers,  but  no 
decision  had  been  come  to,  and  now  it  was  stated  that  a  com- 
promise had  been  arrived  at.  King  Leopold  had  lately  been 
paid  a  large  sum  of  money  arising  from  the  Crown  domains,  and 
it  was  suggested  by  the  compromise  that  these  funds,  instead  of 
being  dealt  with  by  the  King,  should  be  administered  by  a 
committee,  mostly  members  of  the  Belgian  Parliament,  nomin- 
ated by  King  Leopold.  There  was  no  alteration  in  the  way  the 
revenue  was  to  be  spent,  but  only  in  the  personnel  of  those 
administering  it.  The  compromise  could  not  be  taken  as  a 
serious  effort  on  the  part  of  the  Belgian  Government,  and 
against  it  he  earnestly  protested.  There  was  something  in  The 
Times  of  to-day  which  he  quoted  as  showing  what  was  going  on 
between  the  Ministry  and  the  King.  The  Times  correspondent 
in  Brussels  telegraphed  : — "  I  hear  on  good  authority  that 
serious  difficulties  have  arisen  between  the  King  and  the 
Government.  There  is  danger  that  a  Ministerial  crisis  may 
develop  shortly."  According  to  a  statement  in  the  Etoile 
Beige: — "It  is  certainly  the  case  that  the  exchanges  of  views 
which  have  taken  place  during  the  last  few  days  have  not  led  to 
any  result,  and  an  agreement  has  not  been  reached  regarding 
the  list  of  public  works  to  be  carried  out  with  the  revenues  of 
the  special  fund  which  is  to  be  derived  from  the  Crown  domain." 
What,  then,  became  of  all  the  reforms  in  Congo  administration 


they  had  been  looking  for  ?  The  King  and  his  Ministers  were 
simply  fighting  about  whether  certain  buildings  in  the  Congo 
are  to  be  built  or  not ;  there  was  no  question  of  reforms  in  the 
Congo  whatever.  He  must  ask  the  Government,  was  this  really 
the  "  Belgian  solution  "  they  were  looking  for?  He  could  hardly 
believe  it.  It  was  but  a  short  time  since  his  Majesty's  gracious 
Speech  was  heard  in  the  House,  but  he  would  read  a  paragraph 
of  it : — "  My  Government  are  fully  aware  of  the  great  anxiety 
felt  with  regard  to  the  treatment  of  the  native  population  in 
the  Congo  State.  Their  sole  desire  is  to  see  the  government  of 
that  State  humanely  administered  in  accordance  with  the  spirit 
of  the  Berlin  Act,  and  I  trust  that  the  negotiations  now  pro- 
ceeding between  the  Sovereign  of  the  Congo  State  and  the 
Belgian  Government  will  secure  this  object."  He  would  take  it 
that  was  the  policy  of  the  Government,  and  that  the  Govern- 
ment intended  to  carry  it  out.  In  no  party  spirit  did  he  press 
this  matter ;  it  was  no  party  question,  as  was  clearly  demonstrated 
at  the  huge  meeting  held  in  the  Queen's  Hall  the  other  evening. 
He  felt  sure  that  the  dilatory  tactics  between  King  Leopold  and 
his  Ministers  would  be  continued.  There  was  an  instance  in 
the  pretended  compromise,  which  he  might  call  by  an  ugly 
name.  We  could  not  always  be  waiting  and  watching.  A 
suggestion  he  had,  which  had  been  made  before.  By  one  of  the 
articles  of  the  Convention  of  1884  between  our  Government  and 
the  International  Association  of  the  Congo  we  had  a  right  to 
appoint  Consuls  in  those  regions.  At  present,  in  the  whole  of 
the  territory — as  large  as  Europe  less  Eussia — we  had  but 
one  Consul  and  two  Vice-Consuls.  If  our  Consuls  were 
appointed,  it  would  not  prevent  other  Powers  putting  Consuls 
in  the  Congo,  and  it  would  be  some  assurance  against  ill- 
treatment  of  the  natives.  As  his  noble  friend  Lord  Lansdowne, 
speaking  on  the  subject  on  July  3,  1906,  said,  the  presence  of 
half  a  dozen  representatives  of  European  Powers  would  do  more 
than  any  number  of  inspectors  and  officials  of  the  Congo  State. 
The  abuses  continued,  and  the  warehouses  at  Antwerp  were 
filled  with  Congo  rubber.  A  letter  in  The  Times  of  to-day 
showed  that  there  had  been  very  little  alteration  in  the  methods 
of  obtaining  that  rubber.  Besides  this,  he  would  ask  the 
Government  to  declare  to  Belgium  that  annexation  under  the 
present  terms  was  totally  unacceptable,  and,  in  the  next  place, 
the  rights  of  the  natives  in  the  soil  and  its  products  should  be 
insisted  upon.  The  honour  of  this  country  was  affected. 
England  suppressed  the  slave  trade,  and  how  could  she  remain 
inactive  when  conditions  worse  than  slavery  existed  next  door 
to  her  own  African  possessions?  (Hear,  hear.)  He  formally 
moved  for  papers. 


Earl  Crorner. — Your  lordships  will  pardon  me  for  taking 
part  in  this  discussion.  I  do  not  think  it  is  necessary  to  dwell 
at  any  length  on  the  manner  in  which  the  ruler  of  the  Congo 
State  has  discharged  the  high  and  honourable  trust  conferred 
on  him  by  Europe.  The  indictments  against  Congo  administra- 
tion were  at  first  received  in  this  country  with  a  certain  amount 
of  incredulity,  but  the  facts  are  now  well  known.  I  have  seen 
something,  and  I  have  heard  more,  of  maladministration  in 
backward  States  in  the  hands  of  despotic,  irresponsible  rulers, 
but  I  assert  without  hesitation  that  never  in  my  experience 
have  I  seen  or  have  I  heard  of  misrule  comparable  to  the  abuses 
that  have  grown  up  in  the  Congo  State.  (Hear,  hear.)  There 
has  been  a  cynical  disregard  of  the  native  races  and  a  merciless 
exploitation  of  the  country  in  the  interest  of  foreigners  for 
which  I  believe  a  parallel  cannot  be  found  in  the  history  of 
modern  times.  (Hear,  hear.) 


I  do  not  base  my  severe  condemnation  only  on  the  cruelty 
and  oppression  of  the  natives,  though  on  this  charge  an  unanswer- 
able indictment  might  be  made  ;  I  base  it  in  addition  on  the 
disregard  of  three  principles  in  administration,  and  I  say  that 
unless  a  radical  change  is  made  in  the  system  of  administration 
no  serious  improvement  can  be  anticipated.  In  all  countries 
similar  to  the  Congo  territory  three  essential  principles  must  be 
accepted  as  preliminary  to  the  establishment  of  anything  like 
good  administration,  and  all  these  principles  have  been  flagrantly 
violated  in  the  Congo  State.  The  first  principle  is  that  the 
duties  of  administration  and  the  commercial  development  of  the 
.country  should  not  be  vested  in  the  same  individuals.  (Hear, 
hear.)  The  counter-principle  of  associating  the  two  functions 
we  tried  ourselves  years  ago  with  the  old  East  India  Company, 
and  though  we  had  at  the  head  of  it  many  men  who  were  not 
only  merchants,  but  statesmen,  the  system  of  government,  if 
not  a  failure,  was  at  the  best  but  a  very  modified  success.  But 
in  the  Congo  the  officials  employed  have  been  commercial  agents 
rather  than  administrators,  and  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  they 
have  been  judged  for  their  services  by  the  standard  of  the 
amount  of  money  they,  by  any  means  justifiable  or  the  reverse, 
have  poured  into  the  Congo  treasury.  The  first  principle  has 
thus  been  flagrantly  violated.  The  second  principle  is  that  by 
the  establishment  of  a  Civil  List  the  amount  placed  at  the 
personal  disposal  of  the  ruler  of  the  State  should  be  a  fixed 
amount  and  that  the  revenue  from  the  country  should  be 
applied  by  properly  qualified  and  responsible  authorities  to 
objects  in  which  the  subjects  of  the  State  as  distinct  from  the 


ruler  have  an  interest.  A  despotic  ruler  always  demurs  to  this. 
I  remember  some  years  ago — I  think  it  was  in  1879 — there  was 
a  question  of  appointing  an  Englishman  to  supervise  the  financial 
affairs  of  Turkey,  and  the  Sultan  did  me  the  honour  to  consider 
my  name  in  association  with  the  service.  I  asked  if  his  Majesty 
would  be  prepared  to  accept  the  settlement  of  a  Civil  List,  and 
then,  as  I  had  anticipated,  further  discussion  of  the  subject  was 
allowed  to  drop.  (Laughter.)  Well,  in  the  Congo  there  is  no 
Civil  List,  and  the  whole  of  the  revenue  of  the  country  is  at  the 
absolute  disposal  of  the  ruler  ;  and  a  large  portion  of  it  is 
applied  to  the  construction  of  palaces  and  to  other  objects  in 
which  the  natives  have  not  the  remotest  interest.  The  second 
principle  then  is  violated.  The  third  principle  is  that  the 
Crown  domains  should  be  settled  and  administered  by  respon- 
sible qualified  authorities  in  the  general  interest  of  the  com- 
munity. In  the  Congo  State  almost  the  whole  country  has 
been  handed  over  to  speculators,  and  the  chief  of  the  State  is 
the  principal  speculator  among  them.  These  speculators  have 
ruthlessly  exploited  the  resources  of  the  country  in  their  own 
interest.  A  very  similar  state  of  things  existed  in  Egypt  some 
twenty  years  ago.  Ismail  Pasha  had  managed  to  accumulate  in 
his  hands  a  million  acres  of  the  best  land  in  Egypt  by  arbitrary 
and  illicit  means  under  a  thin,  transparent  veil  of  legality. 
When  the  Powers  of  Europe  came  to  deal  with  the  subject  of 
finance  they  considered  it  an  abuse  of  power  to  acquire  this  as 
private  property  for  the  ruler,  and  the  whole  was  converted 
into  property  to  be  administered  by  proper  authorities  for  the 
good  of  the  country,  and  it  was  sold  to  native  proprietors.  I  am 
quite  sure  no  satisfactory  solution  is  possible  in  the  Congo  unless 
a  similar  course  is  followed  and  one  class  of  interests  is  sacrificed. 
There  are  to  be  considered  the  interest  of  the  Congolese,  of  the 
Belgian  taxpayers,  and  the  interest  of  the  concessionaires.  I 
estimate  the  interests  of  the  Congolese  and  of  the  Belgian  tax- 
payers very  highly,  but  I  place  the  interest  of  concessionnaires 
in  the  third  rank,  and  rather  low  at  that.  If  there  is  a  sacrifice 
to  be  made  they  should  make  it  ;  and  I  hope  the  Belgian  Parlia- 
ment, to  whom  we  must  first  look,  will  not  deal  too  tenderly 
with  the  rights  of  concessionnaires. 


Turning  to  another  point,  let  me  say  I  would  be  the  last  to 
advocate  any  excessive  interference  with  the  domestic  affairs  of 
a  foreign  country.  More  than  this,  I  sometimes  think  the 
British  public  in  the  exercise  of  their  unquestioned  right  to  say 
anything  they  please,  sometimes  go  to  rather  indiscreet  lengths 
in  the  direction  of  advising  foreign  nations  how  they  should 


manage  their  own  affairs.  In  this  case  we  need  not  be  deterred 
by  any  scruples  of  this  nature.  The  Berlin  Act  is  perfectly 
plain.  It  lays  down  that  there  is  to  be  freedom  of  trade,  and  it 
condemns  the  creation  of  monopolies.  The  Act  of  1884,  which 
was  passed  by  agreement  between  the  British  Government  and 
the  Congo  Association,  is  also  perfectly  clear.  Moreover,  the 
declarations  of  M.  Beernaert  in  1885  when  he  was  Prime 
Minister  of  Belgium,  and  of  Baron  Lambermont,  who  was  the 
Belgian  representative  at  the  Berlin  Conference,  were  also 
perfectly  explicit.  I  will  read  what  was  said  by  the  noble 
marquis  behind  me  (Lord  Lansdowne)  in  1906.  I  do  so  because 
the  statement  has  been  challenged,  and,  although  I  have  no 
doubt  he  could  give  a  much  better  answer  himself,  I  will,  if  he 
will  permit  me,  give  a  rejoinder  for  him.  He  said  : — "  Quite 
irrespective  of  any  right  we  enjoy  under  the  letter  of  these  Acts, 
we  have  a  moral  right  to  interfere,  which  comes  to  us  in 
consequence  of  the  false  pretences — I  cannot  use  a  gentler 
word — under  which  the  Congo  State  has  acquired  its  privileged 
position  in  that  part  of  Africa."  The  Belgian  Commissioners 
contested  this  right,  and  on  page  151  of  their  report  stated  the 
alleged  rights  of  the  Congo  State — in  other  words,  those  of  King 
Leopold — in  the  following  very  plain  language  : — "  The  Congo 
State  can  dispose  itself  solely  of  all  the  products  of  the  soil, 
prosecute  as  a  thief  any  one  who  takes  from  that  land  the  least 
of  its  fruits,  or  as  a  receiver  of  stolen  goods  any  one  who 
receives  such  fruits."  It  is  necessary  to  deal  with  this  point  a 
little,  not  only  because  I  think  Mr.  Morel  is  perfectly  right  in 
thinking  that  this  question  of  freedom  of  trade  lies  at  the 
bottom  of  the  whole  business,  but  also  because  it  is  essential  to 
establish  our  right  to  make  our  voice  heard,  not  merely  on 
grounds  of  public  morality,  but  of  indisputable  treaty  rights. 
On  what  grounds  are  these  rights  contested  ?  Apparently  on 
the  grounds  that  freedom  of  trade  exists,  and  that  no  monopolies 
have  been  created.  M.  Woeste,  a  distinguished  member  of  the 
Belgian  Parliament,  made  the  following  statement : — "  Lord 
Lansdowne  declared,  in  the  British  House  of  Lords,  that  the 
Congo  was  covered  with  monopolies  of  an  abusive  character,  he 
committed  an  astonishing  confusion  of  thought ;  he  mixed  up 
monopolies  with  the  legitimate  and  rational  development  of 
private  property  belonging  to  specified  landlords."  Therefore 
it  appears  that  the  argument  and  the  application  of  the 
argument  are  something  of  this  kind.  In  the  first  place  it  is 
held  that  the  natives  of  the  Congo  have  no  proprietary  rights  in 
the  soil  of  their  country  or  its  products,  and  that  the  whole  of 
these  rights  are  vested  in  the  ruler  of  the  Congo  State.  In  the 
next  place,  the  ruler  hands  over  the  whole  pf  these  rights  to 


certain  "  specified  landlords,"  he  himself  being  the  first  specified 
landlord  ;  and  with  the  help  of  armed  forces  which  could  not  be 
at  the  disposal  of  private  individuals  there  is  introduced  a 
barbarous  system  of  collecting  the  revenue,  which  necessarily 
leads  to  the  enslavement  of  the  greater  part  of  the  population. 
The  third  link  in  the  chain  of  this  reasoning  is  that  any  one,  not 
being  a  "  specified  landlord,"  who  buys  from  the  natives  of  the 
country  the  only  product  they  have  to  sell— rubber — is  to  be 
treated  as  a  thief  and  a  receiver  of  stolen  goods.  Under  this 
system  it  is  stated  that  free  trade  exists  and  there  are  no 
monopolies.  This  is  the  system  which  was  described  by  Baron 
Lambermont  at  the  Berlin  Congress  as  one  which  gave 
everybody  unlimited  right  to  buy  and  sell.  If  this  is  free  trade 
I  give  the  tariff  reformers  full  permission  to  write  me  down  a 
protectionist  or  anything  else  they  like,  except  a  free  trader. 
But  in  point  of  fact  the  united  authority  of  lawyers  in  Belgium 
and  all  Europe  will  not  convince  me  that  a  system  of  this  sort 
is  sanctioned  by  any  law,  human  or  Divine,  or  that  it  could  be 
made  to  harmonise  with  the  treaty  right  of  other  Powers 
including  that  of  Great  Britain.  (Cheers.)  The  view  the 
Government  take  of  this  important  question  was  stated  in 
August,  1903,  in  a  circular  addressed  to  the  Powers,  containing 
these  words  : — "  His  Majesty's  Government  maintain  that  until 
unoccupied  land  is  reduced  to  individual  occupation,  and  so  long 
as  the  produce  can  only  be  collected  by  the  native,  the  native 
should  be  free  to  dispose  of  the  produce  as  he  pleases."  This 
principle,  which  I  hold  to  be  perfectly  sound,  is  one  which  I 
have  no  doubt  was  asserted  after  taking  qualified  legal  advice  ; 
and  I  trust  this  principle  will  be  maintained  in  spite  of  any 
quibble  by  which  it  may  be  attacked.  The  right  of  the  British 
nation  to  make  its  voice  heard  is  perfectly  clear,  and  the  only 
questions  for  discussion  are  as  to  the  desirability  of  exercising 
that  right  and  the  time  and  method  of  exercising  it. 


Both  the  Belgian  Government  and  the  Belgian  people  are  in  a 
position  of  great  difficulty,  and  I  should  much  regret  that  any 
language  used  either  by  me  or  by  any  one  else  in  this  House 
should  add  to  their  embarrassment.  It  cannot  be  doubted  that 
a  strong  feeling  of  indignation  has  been  excited  in  this  country 
by  the  manner  in  which  the  Congo  has  been  administered  ;  and, 
moreover,  that  is  accompanied  by  a  feeling  of  shame  that,  as  one 
of  the  signatories  to  the  Berlin  Act,  Great  Britain  should  have 
been  in  any  way  contributory  to  such  a  system  as  now  exists  in 
the  Congo.  The  Congo  Reform  Association  is  naturally 
impatient  at  the  slowness  with  which  the  international  mill 


grinds,  and  I  can  fully  sympathise  with  this  feeling.  I  have 
had  a  prolonged  and  somewhat  bitter  experience  of  that  mill  ; 
and  I  know  how  heart-breaking  it  is  to  look  on  while  some 
flagrant  abuse  calls  for  reform,  and  yet  it  is  impossible  to  apply 
any  prompt  and  effective  remedy.  The  Congo  Reform  Associa- 
tion appear  to  contemplate  that  in  certain  contigencies  some 
decided  action  even  more  drastic  than  that  to  which  the  noble 
earl  alluded  should  at  some  time  or  another  be  taken  by  his 
Majesty's  Government.  I  think  it  would  be  premature  to 
discuss  this  matter  at  present.  (Hear,  hear.)  It  has  to  "be 
remembered,  undoubtedly,  that  in  a  matter  of  international 
concern  any  step  which  separates  this  country  from  the  inter- 
national concert  is  one  of  a  very  serious  nature.  It  is  well  to 
remember  that  under  the  Act  of  1884  his  Majesty's  Government 
had  the  right  not  only  to  appoint  Consuls,  but  to  establish 
Consular  Courts.  I  hope  that  should  the  occasion  arise  that 
right  will  be  exercised.  I  cannot  help  thinking  that  if  Consuls 
were  appointed  and  at  the  same  time  means  of  locomotion  were 
provided  to  enable  them  to  move  freely  up  and  down  the  river, 
and  Consular  Courts  were  established,  and  if  at  the  same  time 
we  insisted  on  the  unquestionable  right  of  British  subjects  to 
trade  throughout  the  Congo,  some  effective  pressure  would  be 
exerted  on  the  Congo  Administration,  and  a  considerable  step  in 
advance  would  be  made.  In  spite  of  what  the  noble  earl  has 
said,  I  still  cling  to  the  hope  that  the  Belgian  solution  may  be 
possible.  I  do  not  go  nearly  so  far  as  to  say  that  we  are  under 
any  obligation  to  accept  anything  which  may  be  settled  in 
Brussels.  Far  from  it.  Our  right  to  make  our  voice  heard  is 
perfectly  clear,  and  I  venture  to  think  that  no  solution  will  be 
satisfactory  unless  it  gives  full  and  complete  Parliamentary 
control  over  the  whole  of  the  Congo  administration.  It  must  be 
borne  in  mind  that,  although  we  know  something  of  the 
discussion  going  on  in  Belgium,  the  Belgian  proposals  in  their 
final  form  are  not  yet  before  the  world.  When  they  are  known 
I  hope  that  the  noble  lord  the  Under- Secretary  for  Foreign 
Affairs  will  be  able  to  assure  the  House  that  the  Government 
will  not  acquiesce  in  any  arrangement  which  does  not  give  the 
full  parliamentary  control  of  which  I  speak.  (Cheers.)  If  that 
Parliamentary  control  is  once  assured,  there  will  then  be  some 
solid  guarantee  that  the  Act  of  Berlin  will  be  accepted  and  the 
administration  of  affairs  will  be  improved.  If  once  a  real  and 
effective  control  is  secured,  I  should  not,  for  my  own  part,  be 
inclined  to  scrutinise  too  closely  the  other  details  of  the  Belgian 
arrangements  ;  but  that  control  must  be  fully  secured.  In  the 
meantime  we  can  no  doubt  do  a  great  deal  to  enlighten  Belgian 
public  opinion.  It  cannot  be  too  clearly  understood  that  we  do 
P.W.  S 


not  wish  any  territorial  advantage.  I  conceive  that  it  would 
not  be  at  all  in  the  interests  of  this  country  to  add  to  our  world- 
wide responsibilities  by  assuming  the  direct  administration  of 
any  portion  of  the  Congo  State.  All  we  want  is  that  the  Congo 
should  be  governed  on  such  principles  as  commend  themselves 
to  the  civilised  world.  It  must  be  borne  in  mind  that  the 
Belgian  people  and  Parliament  are  labouring  under  great 
difficulties.  Not  only  is  the  issue  complicated  by  the  intro- 
duction of  other  matters  connected  with  the  internal  affairs  of 
Belgium,  with  which  we  are  not  concerned  ;  but  the  greater 
portion  of  the  Belgian  Press  has  up  to  the  present  time  been 
under  the  control  of  the  Congo  administration,  with  the  natural 
result  that  the  Belgians  themselves  are  ill-informed  of  the  facts. 
It  has  been  suggested  that  the  noble  marquis  behind  me,  in  the 
speech  from  which  I  have  already  quoted,  said  something  which 
was  tantamount  to  alleging  that  the  people  of  this  country  had 
been  duped.  So  also  had  the  Belgians.  They  had  been  entirely 
deceived  as  to  the  true  facts  of  the  case. '  So  far  as  I  can 
understand  a  considerable  section  of  the  Belgian  public  are 
reluctant  to  take  the  great  responsibility  of  governing  the  Congo, 
more  especially  in  view  of  the  financial  responsibilities  ;  and  I 
am  not  at  all  surprised,  for  if  the  country  is  to  be  properly 
administered,  the  revenue,  which  depends  largely  on  the  rubber, 
is  certain  to  fall  off.  On  the  other  hand  large  reductions  may 
be  made  in  the  expenditure.  Why  is  the  present  large  military 
force  maintained  in  the  Congo  if  not  to  aid  in  the  present 
iniquitous  system  of  collecting  taxes  ?  (Cheers.)  I  have  myself 
seen  on  the  Congo  police  stations  on  the  Upper  Nile  garrisons 
far  larger  than  in  Uganda  and  Assuan.  I  believe  these 
garrisons  might  be  largely  reduced  with  great  advantage.  The 
financial  difficulties,  though  very  great,  may  not  be  found 
insuperable  if  the  question  is  tackled  in  a  proper  spirit ;  and  the 
proper  spirit  in  which  to  tackle  it  is  to  look  to  the  interests  of 
the  Congolese  with  real  regard  to  the  necessities  of  the  various 
taxpayers  rather  than  to  the  interests  of  the  concessionnaires. 
Keep  the  river  open  and  have  a  due  police  force  on  the  river 
bank.  The  main  portion  of  the  territory  will  then  require  little 
administration  at  all.  The  main  thing  is  that  we  should  destroy 
the  present  system,  and  that  we  should  not  pause  in  that  work 
of  destruction  merely  because  it  would  not  be  possible  to  place 
immediately  anything  very  satisfactory  in  its  place. 


Let  me  add  that  I  know  something  of  the  difficulty  of 
substituting  free  for  forced  labour.  We  had  to  deal  with  it  in 
Egypt,  and  a  difficult  and  thorny  problem  it  was ;  but  it  was 


solved  in  the  face  of  obstacles  which,  I  think,  were  greater  than 
those  that  now  exist  in  the  Congo.  A  solution  will  never  be 
obtained  in  the  Congo  if  the  first  object  of  the  Congo  Associa- 
tion is  to  pay  large  dividends.  Up  to  the  present  the  question, 
as  it  affects  the  Congo,  has  been  considered  from  a  point  of  view 
wholly  different  to  that  from  which  we  viewed  it  in  Egypt.  In 
a  paper  issued  by  the  Congo  Association  I  read  a  statement  to 
the  effect  that  the  triumph  of  law  was  to  make  the  black  man 
work.  In  Egypt  we  thought  that  whilst  giving  every  induce- 
ment to  the  Egyptian  to  work,  the  triumph  of  the  law  consisted 
in  preventing  him  being  flogged  for  voluntarily  choosing  to 
remain  idle.  It  is  for  the  Belgians  to  say  which  is  more  in 
harmony  with  the  practices  of  the  civilisation  under  which  we 
live.  I  feel  confident  that  his  Majesty's  Government  will  receive 
the  full  support  of  Parliament  and  public  opinion  in  en- 
deavouring to  find  some  satisfactory  solution  of  a  question  which 
touches  the  honour  and  interest  of  this  country.  We  sympathise 
with  the  Belgians  in  their  difficulty ;  but  we  await  their 
solution.  It  will  be  time  to  consider  what  further  steps  should 
be  taken  if  that  solution  is  considered  unsatisfactory.  The 
alternative  to  the  Belgian  solution  is  said  to  be  some  form  of 
international  Government.  An  appeal  has  been  made  by  us  to 
other  nations ;  and  the  result  has  not  been  altogether  en- 
couraging. I  think  the  only  potentate  in  Europe  who  evinced 
any  desire  to  co-operate  in  the  reform  of  the  Congo  was  the 
Sultan  of  Turkey.  (Laughter.)  It  must,  moreover,  be 
remembered  that  international  administration — though  some- 
times it  has  been  made  use  of  in  default  of  anything  better — is, 
at  best,  a  cumbersome  and  inefficient  machine.  Further,  in  view 
of  the  state  of  affairs  in  Macedonia,  the  moment  is  hardly 
propitious  for  inviting  the  Powers  to  an  international  concert 
about  another  matter.  Therefore,  when  the  Belgian  solution  is 
better  known  it  will  be  examined  in  a  friendly  spirit,  and  will 
not  be  rejected  unless  for  paramount  reasons.  But  it  must  be  a 
reasonably  satisfactory  solution.  If  it  be  but  a  mere  cloak 
under  which  the  present  system  in  the  Congo  is  to  be  continued, 
I  hope  his  Majesty's  Government  will  have  no  hesitation  in 
unanimously  rejecting  it.  (Cheers.) 

The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  thought  it  was  no  disparage- 
ment to  the  statesmen  and  diplomatists  who  had  addressed  the 
House  on  this  subject  year  by  year  to  say  that  the  House  had 
just  listened  with  exceptional  interest  and  respect  to  a  speech 
by  one  whose  administrative  record  in  Asia  and  Africa  had 
given  him  in  his  country's  history  an  enduring  place  as  a  past 
master  in  the  science  which  treated  of  the  relations  to  one 
another  of  men  of  different  race,  religion,  and  colour.  (Hear, 


hear.)  The  noble  earl's  speech  was  a  reminder  that  this  question 
was  not  an  isolated  question  concerning  the  Congo  alone. 
Another  great  African  administrator,  Sir  Harry  Johnston,  had 
written  the  following  memorable  warning  : — 

"  Unless  some  stop  can  be  put  to  the  misgovernment  of  the 
Congo  regions,  I  venture  to  warn  those  who  are  interested  in 
African  politics  that  a  movement  is  already  begun,  and  is 
spreading  fast,  which  will  unite  the  negroes  against  the  white 
race,  a  movement  which  will  prematurely  stamp  out  the 
beginnings  of  the  new  civilisation  we  are  trying  to  implant,  and 
against  which  movement,  except  so  far  as  the  actual  coast  line  is 
concerned,  the  resources  of  men  and  money  which  Europe  can 
put  into  the  field  will  be  powerless." 

It  was  the  terrible  peril,  thus  foreshadowed,  which  brought 
upon  the  stage  in  this  matter  those  of  them  who  for  the  most 
part  were  accustomed  to  stand  outside  the  difficult  and  delicate 
questions  of  diplomatic  controversy  and  international  polity. 
It  could  not  be  too  often  recalled  that  the  creation  of  the  Congo 
State  was,  in  part  at  least,  the  handiwork  of  men  whose  interest 
lay  in  philanthropic  and  religious  work.  It  would  be  untrue  to 
say  that  the  commercial  element  was  wholly  absent.  But  the 
creation  of  the  Congo  was  not  due  to  a  desire  for  national 
aggrandisement  on  the  part  of  Belgium,  or  England,  or  any 
other  State.  It  was  in  a  large  measure  an  honest  desire  for 
the  civilisation  and  betterment  of  a  great  tract  of  Africa,  the 
character  of  which  had  been  brought  almost  suddenly  to  the 
knowledge  of  Europe.  That  was  the  reason  why  the  Lord 
Mayor  presided  at  the  great  meeting  in  the  Queen's  Hall 
recently,  not  as  the  head  of  the  commercial  life  of  the  City,  but 
as  the  central  figure  in  England's  philanthropic  efforts.  The 
citizens,  generally,  felt  that  responsibility  for  the  state  of  things 
in  the  Congo  rested  heavily  upon  them.  They  turned  to  the 
Foreign  Office  representatives,  not  for  the  facts  in  the  Congo — 
for  those,  unhappily,  they  knew  too  well— but  for  information 
as  to  the  forces  and  powers  behind  those  dark  deeds.  It  was 
true  that  negro  slavery  had  been  resuscitated  in  perhaps  its 
darkest  or  reddest  form  in  the  Congo.  It  was  true  that  for  that 
England  was  in  part  responsible.  Was  the  only  answer  they 
were  to  get  but  this — "  We  must  wait  and  hope  for  the  best"  ? 
Two  things  the  country  wanted.  First,  a  consecutive  statement 
from  the  Foreign  Office  of  the  steps  which  had  led  up  to  the 
announcement  on  the  subject  in  the  King's  Speech,  and  of  what 
exactly  that  announcement  amounted  to.  Secondly,  what 
grounds  the  Government  had  for  the  opinion—  if  it  were  their 
opinion — that  it  would  be  easier  to  get  redress  for  the  black 
men's  wrongs  after  the  Congo  was  annexed  by  Belgium  than 


before.  To  some  of  them,  amateurs  in  these  matters,  it  might 
seem  that  if  this  country  were  acquiescent  in  an  annexation 
which  carried  on,  though  in  other  hands,  the  old  regime  of 
ownership  by  Belgians  of  those  black  men's  property,  and, 
indeed,  their  lives,  it  would  be  harder  and  not  easier  to  make 
protest  against  it  when  the  arrangement  had  been  adopted  by 
Belgium.  He  might  be  mistaken  in  that  view,  but  it  was  one  of 
those  things  upon  which  he  should  like  to  have  fuller  informa- 
tion and  guidance  than  we  had  at  present.  After  the 
momentous  and  responsible  utterance  in  the  King's  Speech  he 
felt  that  this  was  an  occasion  which  far  transcended  any  mere 
question  of  contemporary  politics.  It  was  surely  true  to  say 
that  we  were  here  face  to  face  with  the  big  principles  of  right 
and  wrong.  The  moral  law,  as  they  had  been  reminded  by 
great  teachers,  was  not  written  for  men  alone  in  their  individual 
capacity,  but  also  for  nations.  If  the  English  people,  on  whom 
responsibility  indisputably  rested,  rejected  by  their  indifference 
or  inaction  the  application  of  the  moral  law,  some  penalty,  on 
whomsoever  it  fell,  must  follow.  We  had  experience,  we  knew 
what  the  past  had  cost  us,  we  had  suffered,  and  suffered  rightly, 
for  the  neglect  or  the  wrongdoing  of  other  days.  They  wanted 
to  be  sure  that  we  were  not  incurring  afresh  by  our  inaction  a 
like  answerableness  for  new  wrongdoings  to-day.  It  was  upon 
that  that  they  awaited  in  eager  anxiety  the  reply  which  the 
Government  would  give.  (Hear,  hear.) 

Lord  Clifford  of  Chudleigh  said  that  inadvertently  and 
ignorantly  this  country  was  almost  as  much  responsible  for 
what  was  going  on  in  the  Congo  to-day  as  any  of  the  parties 
concerned.  We  acquiesced  in  the  formation  of  that  State,  and 
were  delighted  that  the  King  of  the  Belgians  should  place  himself 
at  its  head.  Many  hard  things  had  since  been  said  about  the 
King  of  the  Belgians,  but  he  for  one  honestly  believed  that  that 
Monarch  had  been  actuated  by  the  ideals  with  which  others  had 
at  first  credited  him.  There  was  one  vital  blot  on  the  whole 
scheme  which  this  country  ought  to  have  discerned.  A 
Government  of  a  civilised  nature  set  up  in  a  savage  country 
could  not  for  some  time  be  financed  out  of  the  taxes  raised  from 
that  country.  The  curse  of  forced  labour  was  introduced 
because  there  was  no  other  means  of  raising  revenue,  and  they 
knew  that  when  forced  labour  was  once  introduced  it  was  used 
for  the  development  of  a  country.  They  appealed  to  his 
Majesty's  Government  to  use  their  most  strenuous  efforts  to 
induce  the  Belgian  Government  to  take  over  the  absolute 
control  of  the  finances  and  government  of  the  Congo  State. 

Lord  Fitzmaurice  said  the  repetition  of  debates  in  that  House 


upon  the  subject  of  the  misgovernment  of  the  Congo  must  not  be 
taken  as  a  sign  that  it  occupied  that  place  in  their  discussions 
denoted  in  another  place  by  the  term  "a  hardy  annual."  He 
was  convinced  that  these  debates  were  not  of  that  character. 
He  believed  that  slow  as  the  progress  might  appear  to  some 
impatient  spirits,  nevertheless  an  advance  was  marked  on  each 
of  these  occasions.  He  had  twice  before  addressed  the  House  on 
this  subject  since  the  Government  took  office.  On  the  first 
occasion  there  was  little  to  say  except  to  lament  and  accentuate 
the  terrible  tale  of  misgovernment. 


When  he  spoke  last  year  he  was  at  least  able  to  say  that  there 
was  on  the  edge  of  the  horizon,  though  not  much  above  it,  a 
chance  of  a  solution.  That  solution  was  the  Belgian  solution. 
He  then  expressed  the  hope  that  when  he  had  again  to  speak  on 
the  subject  he  would  be  able  to  announce  some  further  progress. 
He  agreed  with  every  word  that  had  been  said  by  Lord  Cromer 
and  the  most  rev.  prelate  as  to  the  disappointment  which  we 
might  perhaps  justly  feel  that  things  had  not  gone  further  than 
they  had  ;  and  he  could  heartily  endorse  the  view  of  Lord 
Cromer  that,  bearing  in  mind  the  enormous  difficulties  of  the 
situation,  both  internationally  and  in  Belgium,  and  in  this 
country,  we  must  not  be  unduly  impatient.  Further,  bearing 
in  mind  that  barely  a  year  and  a  half  had  elapsed  since  the 
important  resolution  of  December  14,  1906,  known  in  Belgium 
as  the  ordre  du  jour  patriotique,  which  practically  decided  in 
principle  that  the  question  of  annexation  was  to  be  taken  up, 
that  we  were  now  watching  the  crisis  of  the  negotiations,  that 
the  points  of  difference  had  been  reduced  to  a  shape  which 
everybody  could  grasp,  and  that  such  negotiations  were 
necessarily  slow  and  delicate,  he  considered  it  would  be  an 
exaggeration  to  say  that  no  progress  had  been  made  since  last 
year,  and  a  still  greater  exaggeration  to  say  that  no  progress  had 
been  made  during  the  last  two  years.  In  justice  to  Belgium  it 
ought  also  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  Congo  was  not  the  only 
difficult  question  with  which  it  had  to  deal.  Its  Parliament  had, 
like  ours,  to  deal  with  many  great  domestic  and  social  questions, 
and  these  reacted  on  the  course  of  Belgian  policy,  not  only  at 
home  but  abroad.  Twice  during  a  very  short  period  recently 
Ministries  had  resigned  or  been  reconstituted.  We  were  now  at 
a  period  when  the  points  of  difference  in  Belgium  between  the 
reforming  party  and  the  party  who  wished  to  keep  matters  more 
or  less  as  they  were  had  reached  an  acute  stage.  If  it  was  im- 
prudent at  any  time  for  a  Minister  or  a  representative  of  a 
Minister  to  appear  to  be  giving  an  opinion  on  what  was  going  on 


in  another  country,  it  was  certainly  imprudent  at  a  moment  such 
as  the  present.  Words  spoken  here  on  behalf  of  the  Foreign 
Office  might  be  misinterpreted,  and  produce  exactly  opposite 
effects  to  those  which  the  speaker  desired.  The  other  day  he  was 
accused  in  certain  Belgian  newspapers  of  having  compared  the 
King  of  the  Belgians  to  the  Sultan  of  Turkey  simply  because  at 
a  public  meeting  he  had  stated  that  he  did  not  intend  in  his 
speech  to  say  anything  about  the  Congo  or  Macedonia.  If  such 
an  observation  could  do  harm,  how  cautious  it  was  necessary 
he  should  be  that  evening  in  saying  anything  which  could  be 
regarded  in  Belgium  as  showing  a  desire  to  apply  pressure  or  as 
containing  some  subtle  imputation  upon  Belgian  statesmen  or 
parties.  At  the  same  time,  he  felt  that  absolute  silence  might 
be  misunderstood  here.  He  must  therefore  say  a  few  words, 
but  they  would  be  little  more  than  an  amplification  of  what 
might  be  found  in  the  Speech  from  the  Throne.  Before  doing 
that  he  might  tell  his  noble  friend  who  had  introduced  the 
subject  that  papers  would  be  in  their  lordships'  hands  im- 
mediately, and  that  he  hoped  they  would  shortly  be  followed  by 
another  paper  containing  further  reports  which  only  arrived  a 
few  days  ago.  In  that  paper  or  some  other  he  trusted  it  might 
be  possible  to  insert  something  about  the  concessions  and  the 
legal  effect  of  certain  clauses  in  them.  The  Government  had 
not  lost  sight  of  that  question.  Some  suggestions  had  been 
made — not  for  the  first  time — as  to  what  this  country  could  do 
without  asking  the  leave  of  the  Powers  or  anybody  else.  He 
had  stated  before  that  the  Government  had  not  overlooked  the 
possibility  of  their  having  to  exercise  the  right  of  setting  up 
Consular  Courts  ;  but  until  they  knew  whether  the  Belgian 
solution  was  going  to  be  a  reality  it  would  be  premature  to 
make  a  definite  pronouncement  on  that  question.  The  number 
of  Consuls  mentioned  that  evening  had  been  increased.  There 
were  now  not  only  a  Consul  at  Boma  and  two  Vice-Consuls,  but 
a  third  Vice-Consul  had  been  appointed.  His  exact  sphere  had 
not  yet  been  determined  and,  together  with  the  spheres  of  the 
other  Vice-Consuls,  was  at  present  receiving  the  attention  of  the 
Secretary  of  State.  His  Majesty's  Consul  at  Boma  had  been 
provided  with  a  steam  launch,  and  the  question  of  supplying 
the  Vice-Consuls  at  two  other  places  with  similar  launches  was 
now  being  considered.  There  was  another  measure  which  had 
not  been  mentioned  that  evening,  and  which  might  have  still 
larger  results.  The  Berlin  Act  of  1884  contemplated  the 
appointment  of  an  International  Eiver  Commission.  Sir  H. 
Johnston  had  often  told  him  that  the  establishment  of  a 
Commission,  including  representatives  of  all  the  Great  Powers, 
would,  in  his  opinion,  be  by  far  the  most  valuable  thing  that 


could  be  done  to  bring  the  breath  of  public  opinion  upon  these 
regions.  But  we  could  not  set  up  such  a  Commission  by 
ourselves.  The  consent  of  the  Powers  would  be  required,  and 
those  who  were  acquainted  with  the  history  of  the  Danube 
Commission  would  know  that  that  was  not  a  matter  which  could 
easily  be  arranged. 


He  made  no  complaint  that  the  most  rev.  prelate  had  alluded 
to  the  aspect  of  the  question  which  was  summed  up  in  the 
words,  "  The  appeal  to  humanity."  He  was  convinced  that  in 
this  matter  we  had  not  only  treaty  rights,  but  also  a  duty,  and 
it  was  that  aspect  of  the  question,  he  thought,  which  had  struck 
the  public  mind.  (Hear,  hear.)  He  was  glad  to  say  that  the 
feeling  in  this  country  had  also  made  a  great  appeal  to  the 
people  of  the  United  States  of  America  (cheers) ;  and  that  was 
of  great  importance,  not  merely  because  of  the  influence  and 
power  of  the  United  States,  but  because  the  United  States  was 
absolutely  free  from,  and  could  not  in  any  conceivable  circum- 
stances be  charged  with,  what  we,  whatever  we  might  say  or 
do,  were  unfortunately  still  charged  with  sometimes  by  our 
critics  abroad,  and  especially  in  certain  papers  which  repre- 
sented what  might  be  called  the  influence  of  the  Congo  State 
as  it  is — namely,  that  we  were  animated  in  this  matter  by 
purely  selfish  motives— by  territorial  and  commercial  ambitions. 
No  one  could  make  that  charge  against  the  people  of  the  United 
States.  (Hear,  hear.)  They  were  amongst  the  very  first,  if  not 
actually  the  first,  to  recognise  the  International  Association  of 
the  Congo,  and,  therefore,  if  they  came  forward,  and  co-operated 
with  us,  as  they  were  now  doing,  it  was  a  fact  of  first-rate 
importance.  (Hear,  hear.)  His  Majesty's  Government  had 
been  in  consultation  with  the  Government  of  the  United  States, 
our  Minister  and  theirs  had  been  in  communication  with  each 
other  in  Brussels,  and  nothing  could  be  more  valuable  for 
Congo  reform  or  more  agreeable  to  his  Majesty's  Government 
than  that  that  co-operation  should  continue  and  extend.  (Hear, 
hear.)  There  was  one  matter  in  which  the  people  of  the  United 
States  and  the  people  of  this  country  were  particularly 
interested,  and  that  was  the  refusal  of  the  Congo  State  to  carry 
out  its  treaty  obligations  with  regard  to  the  granting  of  sites 
for  churches,  schools,  and  missions.  He  had  hoped  to  be  able 
to  say  something  satisfactory  on  that  question,  but  he  was 
sorry  to  say  that  during  the  last  few  hours  he  had  received 
information  from  Brussels  which  showed  the  attitude  of  the 
Congo  State  to  be  more  unsatisfactory  on  this  question  than  it 
was  a  year  ago.  He  could  only  promise  that  the  Foreign  Office 


would  not  lose  sight  of  the  question,  and  would  continue  to 
press  it.  He  was  glad  to  say  with  regard  to  the  charge  some- 
times made,  that  the  whole  object  of  the  Congo  reform  move- 
ment was  nothing  but  agitation  got  up  by  the  Protestant 
missionaries,  and  that  the  Roman  Catholics  took  no  interest  in 
it,  that  it  only  remained  now  in  the  minds  of  a  few  individuals 
here  and  there.  Many  of  the  most  prominent  leaders  of  the 
movement  in  Belgium  were  leading  Roman  Catholics.  Every 
one  of  the  undertakings  which  the  Sovereign  of  the  Congo  State 
allowed  to  be  made  had  in  practice  been  reduced  to  an  absolute 
nullity  by  influences  and  powers  entirely  outside  the  Belgian 
Government,  the  Belgian  Parliament,  or  the  Belgian  people  ; 
and  the  result  had  been,  perhaps,  as  great  a  negation  of  inter- 
national treaty  rights,  as  great  a  defiance  of  public  law  and  as 
great  a  sacrifice  of  the  interests  of  humanity  as  anything  the 
modern  world  had  heard  of. 


He  would  not  ask  their  lordships  to  look  forward  with 
pleasure  to  reading  the  White  paper  he  had  promised.  It  was 
a  melancholy  record.  It  came  from  men  on  the  spot,  and  in  it 
would  be  found  the  first  outward  and  visible  sign  of  the  co- 
operation between  the  United  States  and  ourselves  to  which  he 
had  alluded,  in  the  shape  of  a  very  interesting  report  from  the 
United  States  Consul.  Anxious  as  he  was  to  avoid  saying  any- 
thing which  might  tend  to  complicate  matters,  he  was  obliged 
to  say  that  the  Government  here  viewed  the  present  situation 
with  anxiety.  These  debates  went  on,  but  no  results  were 
achieved.  When  he  said  that,  he  spoke  with  a  full  conscious- 
ness of  the  enormous  difficulty  of  the  task  before  them.  Lord 
Cromer  had  done  two  things  that  night.  He  had  brought  his 
unrivalled  experience  to  confirm  the  view  that  this  maladminis- 
tration in  the  Congo  State  was  no  figment  of  a  feverish  and 
disordered  imagination  ;  and,  secondly,  he  had  told,  not  only 
their  lordships,  but,  what  was  more  important,  friends  and 
supporters  outside,  that  he  realised  how  enormously  difficult 
the  task  of  the  Government  was.  The  Government  looked  to 
their  lordships,  to  the  other  House,  and  to  the  people  of  the 
country  to  be  with  them.  He  believed  the  Belgian  people 
thoroughly  understood  that  no  comment  had  been  made  or 
suggested  here  upon  them.  (Cheers.)  If  he  had  to  sum  up  the 
position  he  would  say  that  the  present  state  of  things  is 
contrary  both  to  the  dictates  of  humanity  and  to  treaty  obliga- 
tion ;  and,  while  not  desiring  to  enter  into  too  great  detail  as 
to  matters  regarding  which  we  must  primarily  rely  on  the 
wisdom  and  patriotism  of  the  Belgian  people  and  Parliament, 


the  Government  could  not  regard  as  satisfactory  any  arrange- 
ment which  did  not  vindicate  or  secure  the  vindication  of  both 
treaty  obligations  and  the  claims  of  humanity.  (Hear,  hear.) 
That  was  substantially  what  was  contained  in  the  Congo 
paragraph  of  the  King's  Speech.  He  thought  the  state  of 
things  disclosed  in  Mr.  Thesiger's  despatch,  included  in  the 
papers  presented  to  Parliament,  showed  that  the  state  of  the 
Congo  was  such  as  had  been  described  by  the  noble  lord 
opposite,  and  the  Government  considered  it  to  be  in  accordance 
with  treaty  obligations,  on  which  the  Congo  State  was  founded, 
that  the  need  for  reform  should  be  recognised  in  whatever 
arrangement  was  made,  and  that  assurances  should  be  given 
that  reform  should  be  carried  out,  not  only  in  theory,  but  in 
practice,  by  the  Belgian  or  any  other  authority  assuming 
responsibility  for  administration.  (Hear,  hear.)  He  trusted 
these  words  would  adequately  convey  to  Parliament  and  the 
people  of  this  country  that  the  Government  looked  to  the 
people  of  Belgium  and  believed  that  a  body  elected  by  that 
people  conscious  of  the  existence  of  an  educated  public  opinion 
in  their  own  country  and  in  Europe  might  be  trusted  to 
remember  the  high  historical  traditions  connected  with  the 
liberties  and  freedom  of  Belgium,  and  would  extend  the  rights 
they  themselves  enjoyed,  so  far  as  that  was  possible,  to  unhappy, 
long-oppressed  natives  of  the  Congo  State.  (Hear,  hear.) 

The  Bishop  of  Southwark  said  the  House  recognised  the 
strain  of  responsibility  under  which  the  noble  lord  had  spoken, 
listening  with  that  peculiar  attention  which  showed  a  sense  of 
the  importance  of  the  words  as  they  fell.  It  might  seem  pre- 
sumptuous for  a  mere  amateur  to  follow  the  noble  lord  ;  but  as 
amateurs  in  great  numbers  had  discussed  the  matter  outside  it 
was  just  as  well  that  one  should  speak  inside,  and  as  the  facts 
were  fully  known,  outsiders  had  some  justification  for  speaking. 
The  most  ardent  of  those  outsiders  would  be  at  one  with  the 
noble  lord  in  what  he  had  said  as  to  the  relations  between  this 
country  and  Belgium.  To  the  appointment  of  a  third  vice- 
consul  he  did  not  attach  much  importance  as  a  remedy,  but  he 
did  attach  value  to  the  use  of  a  launch  ;  the  swift  movements 
of  the  official  within  his  district  would  certainly  be  most  useful. 
Nor  was  he  much  interested  in  what  the  noble  lord  had  said 
about  missionaries  ;  he  would  rather  leave  all  questions  of 
religion  out  of  account  until  other  elementary  matters  were 
settled.  He  was  grateful,  however,  to  the  noble  lord  for  having 
destroyed  one  of  the  arguments  used  against  the  agitation — that 
it  was  a  matter  of  Protestant  against  Catholic.  That  could  now 
hardly  be  maintained.  It  was  evident  that  the  Congo  rulers 
desired  to  keep  out  of  the  country  everybody  who  could  see, 


hear,  and  report.  Missionaries,  at  great  peril  and  labour,  had 
gathered  the  facts  and  had  been  faithful  reporters.  A  signifi- 
cant phrase  had  been  dropped  by  the  noble  lord  ;  he  said  the 
Government  had  still  to  see  whether  the  scheme  of  annexation 
was  a  reality  or  not.  That  was  precisely  where  outside  opinion 
was  most  sensitive  and  most  disturbed.  The  fear  was  some- 
thing of  this  kind,  that  the  Government,  feeling  the  enormous 
pressure  of  the  international  difficulty,  would  be  too  much 
inclined  to  see  whether  after  all  it  would  not  be  enough  and, 
indeed,  better  to  say  :  "  We  know  this  scheme  of  annexation  is 
really  quite  unsatisfactory,  it  gives  no  security  for  radical 
change,  but  it  does  this,  it  cloes  bring  Congo  administration  into 
some  kind  of  relation,  imperfect  though  it  may  be,  with  the 
Belgian  Chamber  and  its  debates,  and  such  is  our  faith  in 
Parliamentary  discussion  that  we  think  this  must  bring  about 
amelioration."  He  could  not  help  thinking  that  there  was  very 
real  danger  in  that — he  might  almost  call  it  a  temptation — to 
which  this  or  any  Government  might  be  exposed.  In  the  first 
place,  this  was  mainly  an  administrative  question,  and  the 
administration  would  remain  entirely  in  the  hands  in  which  it 
has  hitherto  been,  and  discussion  would  be  carried  on  by  those 
who  had  not  the  money  to  carry  out  changes.  Any  real  change 
would  mean  a  demand  Belgian  finance  could  hardly  bear. 
Belgium  had  not  the  knowledge  and  experience  to  deal 
familiarly  with  colonial  affairs,  and  the  Belgian  Chamber  was 
not  accustomed  to  interest  itself  with  matters  outside  its  own 
land.  Nor  was  there  power  to  enforce  improvements.  There 
would,  therefore,  be  a  very  imperfect  advantage  to  be  hoped  for, 
Y/hile,  on  the  other  hand,  there  would  be  the  loss  to  this  country 
of  the  opportunity  for  frank,  consistent  action  under  treaty 
obligations.  The  moral  feeling  of  the  country,  of  which  the 
noble  lord  had  spoken,  was  one  of  its  most  precious  assets.  If 
they  always  opposed  to  it  this  wall  of  international  difficulty  it 
would  get  accustomed  to  beat  at  the  door  in  that  wall  in  vain, 
and  the  feeling  would  spread,  as  he  thought  he  saw  it  already 
spreading,  that  it  was  no  good  appealing  to  principles  of  justice 
in  this  country.  If  in  this  case,  where  the  facts  were  not 
disputed,  England  could  not  live  up  to  her  old  traditions  as  a 
protector  of  freedom  and  an  emancipator  of  slaves,  the  effect  on 
the  future  of  that  most  precious  asset — its  own  moral  force — 
might  be  more  serious  than  perhaps  we  thought.  (Cheers.) 

The  Marquis  of  Lansdowne.— I  rise  mainly  because  if  one  or 
two  words  were  not  spoken  from  this  bench  the  impression 
might  be  created  that  there  was  a  difference  of  opinion  between 
the  two  sides  of  this  House  upon  this  important  subject — a 
difference  of  opinion  in  which  I  for  one  do  not  in  the  least 


believe.  I  have  on  several  occasions  addressed  your  lordships 
on  this  subject,  using,  I  think,  stronger  language  than  that 
which  I  am  generally  in  the  habit  of  using  in  this  House  ;  but 
of  what  I  have  said  on  former  occasions  I  am  not  disposed  to 
retract  one  single  syllable.  (Cheers.)  For  another  reason  I 
may  perhaps  excuse  myself  for  saying  more  than  a  few  words. 
My  noble  friend  (Lord"  Cromer)  on  the  cross-benches  was  good 
enough  to  single  out  from  speeches  of  mine  one  or  two  of  the 
most  emphatic  statements  which  I  have  ventured  to  make,  and 
to  justify  me  with  a  weight  of  authority  to  which  I  cannot 
pretend.  I  hope  it  may  not  be  the  last  time  on  which  my  noble 
friend  will  give  me  the  support  of  his  great  authority.  I 
believe  that  in  all  parts  of  the  House  there  is  an  agreement  that 
the  present  situation  in  the  Congo  is  intolerable  (cheers) ;  and 
that  feeling  will  certainly  not  have  been  diminished  by  the 
statement  which  I  understood  my  noble  friend  who  represents 
the  Foreign  Office  to  make  to  the  effect  that  the  attitude  of  the 
Congo  Government  at  this  moment  was,  if  possible,  more  un- 
compromising than  before.  That  is  a  very  serious  announce- 
ment. (Hear,  hear.)  We  are  most  of  us  in  favour  of  what  has 
been  described  this  evening  as  the  Belgian  solution,  by  which  I 
mean  that  the  jurisdiction  and  privileges  now  possessed  by  the 
Sovereign  of  the  Congo  State  should  be  transferred  to  the 
Belgian  Government.  In  our  view  that  transfer  must  be  a 
real  and  complete  transfer — not  a  transfer  which  any  of  us 
would  regret,  as  would  be  the  case  even  in  acquiescence,  if 
there  were  any  reservation  of  rights,  any  conditions  made 
which  might  have  the  effect  of  impairing  the  full  and  complete 
control  of  the  Belgian  Government  over  the  whole  of  the 
territories  without  exception  now  administered  by  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  Congo  State.  We  are  not  yet  able  to  say  with  any 
degree  of  certainty  whether  the  settlement  which  is  likely  to 
be  accepted  by  the  Belgian  Government  will  or  will  not  include 
these  conditions.  There  is  a  colonial  law  which  has  been  before 
the  Parliamentary  committee  and  there  is  a  draft  treaty  of 
cession.  These  documents,  so  far  as  I  am  able  to  understand 
them,  certainly  seem  to  contain  many  conditions  of  a  very  dis- 
quieting character.  But  the  matter  is  still — so  I  understand  it 
— before  the  Belgian  Parliament ;  and  it  does  not  seem  to  me 
that  we  are  yet  in  a  position  to  pass  judgment  finally  upon  the 
settlement  which  is  likely  to  be  effected.  What  I  venture  to 
put  to  your  lordships  very  strongly  is  this — that  we  should 
hesitate  before  we  do  anything  which  might  embarrass  the 
Belgian  Government  in  dealing  with  this  very  problem  which 
now  awaits  solution  at  their  hands.  Let  us  not  forget  that  all 
the  circumstances  of  the  case  are  of  a  kind  which  entitle  the 


Belgian  Government  to  the  utmost  consideration  This  is  not 
an  enterprise  of  their  seeking.  They  would  probably  be  very 
glad,  if  they  could,  to  escape  altogether  the  heavy  obligations 
which  the  transfer  of  the  Congo  State  will  impose  upon  them. 
Their  task  will  be  one  of  tremendous  magnitude.  It  will  be 
nothing  less  than  the  transformation  of  the  whole  system  under 
which  the  government  of  this  miserably  oppressed*  country  has 
been  conducted.  Let  us  not  also  forget  this — that  this  work  of 
colonial  administration  is  not  work  of  which  the  Belgian 
Government  has  had  any  experience  or  to  which  it  is  at  all 
accustomed.  We  are  therefore  going  to  ask  the  Belgian 
Government  to  undertake  a  task  of  very  great  difficulty,  and 
one  which  no  doubt  will  involve  it  in  great  expense.  Because, 
as  has  been  truly  said  during  the  course  of  this  discussion,  if 
the  Congo  Free  State  is  to  be  administered  with  ordinary 
regard  to  the  dictates  of  humanity,  the  ill-gotten  profits  of 
recent  years  are  bound  to  disappear  ;  and  it  is  by  no  means 
improbable  that  these  profits  will  be  replaced  at  first  by  con- 
siderable loss.  I  therefore  trust  that  we  shall  give  the  Belgian 
Government  such  a  chance  as  ordinary  fair  play  suggests  ;  and 
it  seems  to  me  altogether  premature  that  we  should  at  this 
moment  talk,  as  some  people  have  talked,  not  in  this  House,  of 
sending  ultimatums  to  the  Belgian  Government  to  withdraw  the 
exequaturs  of  Belgian  Consuls,  or  even  of  sending  gunboats — there 
is  always  a  gunboat  at  the  bottom  of  these  suggestions — to  the 
Congo  River.  There  are  remedies  and  remedies ;  and  I  was 
glad  to  hear  my  noble  friend  Lord  Mayo  speak  in  terms  of 
approval  of  a  particular  remedy  which  has  always  seemed  to 
me  to  be  an  appropriate  one,  I  mean  the  increase  in  the  number 
of  British  Consuls  ;  and  if  these  Consuls  are  to  be  given,  as 
Lord  Cronier  proposed,  consular  courts,  and  if  British  traders 
are  to  be  freely  admitted  into  the  country,  I  should  look  forward 
to  excellent  results  following  the  introduction  of  such  a  change. 
It  also  seems  to  me  that  the  appointment  of  a  river  commission 
to  which  my  noble  friend  referred  was  a  very  wholesome 
proposal.  Public  opinion  in  this  country  has  been  more  moved 
over  this  question  than  by  almost  any  question  which  I  can 
remember  (cheers) ;  and  I  hope  that  we  are  not  wrong  in 
believing  that  the  public  of  Belgium  also  has  at  last  been 
moved  by  the  terrible  accounts  which  have  reached  us  as  to 
what  has  been  going  on  in  the  Congo.  I  trust  that  the  result  of  the 
discussion,  which  will  no  doubt  be  carefully  followed  in  Belgium, 
will  be  to  satisfy  the  people  and  the  Government  of  that 
country  that  the  people  and  the  Government  of  Great  Britain 
are  earnestly  bent  upon  the  complete  reversal  of  the  whole 
policy  with  which  the  Congo  Free  State  has  lately  been 


administered,  and  that  they  are  determined  that  an  end  shall 
be  put  to  a  condition  of  things  that  they  have  long  regarded 
with  feelings  of  horror  and  shame.  (Cheers.) 

The  Earl  of  Crewe  agreed  with  the  noble  marquis  that  on  this 
subject  there  was  singular  unanimity  in  all  parts  of  the  House. 
The  same  unanimity,  he  believed,  also  prevailed  all  over  the 
country.  They  had  read  accounts  of  a  system  of  forced  labour 
in  the  Congo  which  was  not  only  not  to  be  distinguished  from 
slavery  but  was  infinitely  harsher  than  many  forms  of  slavery 
which  existed  on  the  African  continent.  He  was  glad  to  know 
that  the  policy  of  the  Government  in  somewhat  increasing  the 
Consular  establishments  in  the  Congo  met  with  the  approval  of 
the  House.  There  could  be  no  question  that  almost  all  the 
records  of  ill- doing  in  Africa,  whether  by  individuals  or  com- 
munities, had  been  very  largely  caused  or  aided  by  the  absence 
of  publicity.  He  thought  it  was  Mr.  Lecky  who  had  said  that 
perhaps  the  only  instance  of  a  really  pure  and  disinterested 
agitation  was  the  agitation  against  the  slave  trade  in  the  early 
part  of  the  nineteenth  century.  The  public  feeling  in  regard 
to  the  Congo  was  equally  pure  and  disinterested.  Lord  Cromer 
had  not  minced  matters  in  speaking  of  the  Congo  State.  There 
was  no  reason,  so  far  'as  its  administration  was  concerned,  why 
he  should.  But  the  noble  lord  recognised  to  the  full  the 
position  of  difficulty  in  which  the  Belgians  were  placed  ;  and 
the  leader  of  the  Opposition  had  laid  further  stress  upon  the 
point.  It  was  one  of  very  great  importance.  What  the 
Belgian  people  were  asked  to  do  was,  without  previous  colonial 
experience,  to  take  over  liabilities  of  an  entirely  unknown 
character,  because  it  was  beyond  dispute  that  the  sweeping 
away  of  the  present  system  in  the  Congo  must  be  attended  by 
considerable  cost.  At  any  rate,  negotiations  with  a  view  to 
transfer  were  now  proceeding  between  King  Leopold  and  the 
Belgian  people.  If  the  proposed  transfer  was  a  genuine  one, 
and  held  out  the  promise  of  an  improved  administration  of  the 
country,  his  Majesty's  Government  should  heartily  welcome  it. 
But  if  it  could  be  shown  that  it  had  elements  of  unreality — that 
was  to  say,  if  it  were  going  to  leave  the  power  where  it  was, 
they  certainly  could  not  regard  it  as  a  proper  solution.  They 
should  then  have  to  look  at  the  matter  afresh,  bearing  in  mind 
the  two  grounds  upon  which  they  had  the  right  to  express  an 
opinion — first,  our  rights  under  treaty  ;  and,  secondly,  our 
rights  of  humanity,  which  we  shared  with  every  civilised 
nation.  Meanwhile  they  did  not  desire  in  any  way  to  prejudice 
the  conduct  of  these  negotiations,  or  to  throw  any  kind  of 
obstacle  in  their  way.  Those  gentlemen  in  Belgium  who  most 
desirecl  to  see  the  administration  of  the  Congo  reformed  would 


be  placed  in  a  position  of  great  difficulty  were  there  anything 
like  an  attitude  of  dictation  from  this  side  of  the  channel.  The 
Government  would,  therefore,  await  the  result  of  the  negotia- 
tions, feeling  confidence  in  the  sound  instincts  of  the  Belgian 
people  and  with  the  hope  that  by  this  means  a  solution  of  a 
most  difficult  problem  would  in  due  course  be  found.  (Hear, 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 


EXERCISE  No.   19. 


ONE  ought,  I  feel,  deliberately  to  reckon  with  death,  and  to 
discount  it.  It  is,  after  all,  the  only  certain  future  event  in 
our  lives. 

And  yet  we  struggle  with  it,  put  it  away  from  us,  live  and 
plan  as  though  it  had  no  existence  ;  or,  if  it  insistently  clouds 
our  thoughts,  as  it  does  at  intervals,  we  wait  resignedly  until 
the  darkness  lifts,  and  until  we  may  resume  our  vivid  interests 

I  do  not,  of  course,  mean  that  it  should  be  a  steady,  melancholy 

E  re-occupation.  If  we  have  to  die,  we  are  also  meant  to  live  ; 
ut  we  ought  to  combine  and  co-ordinate  the  thought  of  it.  It 
ought  to  take  its  place  among  the  other  great  certainties  of  life, 
without  weakening  our  hold  upon  the  activity  of  existence. 
How  is  this  possible  ?  For  the  very  terror  of  death  lies  not  in 
the  sad  accidents  of  mortality,  the  stiffened  and  corrupting  form, 
the  dim  eye,  the  dreadful  pageantry — over  that  we  can  triumph  ; 
but  it  is  the  blank  cessation  of  all  that  we  know  of  life,  the  silence 
of  the  mind  that  loved  us,  the  irreparable  wound. 

Some  turn  hungrily  to  Spiritualism  to  escape  from  this  ter- 
rible mystery.  But,  so  far  as  I  have  looked  into  Spiritualism, 
it  seems  to  me  only  to  have  proved  that,  if  any  communication 
has  ever  been  made  from  beyond  the  gate  of  death — and  even 
such  supposed  phenomena  are  inextricably  intertwined  with 
quackeries  and  deceits — it  is  an  abnormal  and  not  a  normal 
thing.  The  scientific  evidence  for  the  continuance  of  personal 
identity  is  nil ;  the  only  hope  lies  in  the  earnest  desire  of  the 
hungering  heart, 


The  spirit  cries  out  that  it  dare  not,  it  cannot  cease  to  be.  It 
cannot  bear  the  thought  of  all  the  energy  and  activity  of  life 
proceeding  in  its  accustomed  course,  deeds  being  done,  words 
being  uttered,  the  problems  which  the  mind  pondered  being 
solved,  the  hopes  which  the  heart  cherished  being  realised — 
"and  I  not  there."  It  is  a  ghastly  obsession  to  think  of  all 
the  things  that  one  has  loved  best — quiet  work,  the  sunset 
on  familiar  fields,  well-known  rooms,  dear  books,  happy  talk, 
fireside  intercourse — and  one's  own  place  vacant,  one's  posses- 
sions dispersed  among  careless  hands,  eye  and  ear  and  voice 
sealed  and  dumb.  And  yet  how  strange  it  is  that  we  should 
feel  thus  about  the  future,  experience  this  dumb  resentment  at 
the  thought  that  there  should  be  a  future  in  which  one  may 
bear  no  part,  while  we  acquiesce  so  serenely  in  claiming  no 
share  in  the  great  past  of  the  world  that  enacted  itself  before 
we  came  into  being.  It  never  occurs  to  us  to  feel  wronged 
because  we  had  no  conscious  outlook  upon  the  things  that  have 
been  ;  why  should  we  feel  so  unjustly  used  because  our  outlook 
may  be  closed  upon  the  things  that  shall  be  hereafter '(  Why 
should  we  feel  that  the  future  somehow  belongs  to  us,  while  we 
have  no  claim  upon  the  past  ?  It  is  a  strange  and  bewildering 
mystery  ;  but  the  fact  that  the  whole  of  our  nature  cries  out 
against  extinction  is  the  strongest  argument  that  we  shall  yet 
be,  for  why  put  so  intensely  strong  an  instinct  in  the  heart 
unless  it  is  meant  to  be  somehow  satisfied  ? 

Only  one  thought,  and  that  a  stern  one,  can  help  us — and  that 
is  the  certainty  that  we  are  in  stronger  hands  than  our  own. 
The  sense  of  freewill,  the  consciousness  of  the  possibility  of 
effort,  blinds  us  to  this  ;  we  tend  to  mistake  the  ebullience  of 
temperament  for  the  deliberate  choice  of  the  will.  Yet  have  we 
any  choice  at  all  ?  Science  says  no  ;  while  the  mind,  with  no 
less  instinctive  certainty,  cries  out  that  we  have  a  choice.  Yet 
take  some  sharp  crisis  of  life — say  an  overwhelming  temptation. 
If  we  resist  it,  what  is  it  but  a  resultant  of  many  forces  ? 
Experience  of  past  failures  and  past  resolves  combine  with 
trivial  and  momentary  motives  to  make  us  choose  to  resist.  If 
we  fail  and  yield,  the  motive  is  not  strong  enough,  yet  we  have 
the  sense  that  we  might  have  done  differently  :  we  blame 
ourselves,  and  not  the  past  which  made  us  ourselves. 

But  with  death  it  is  different.  Here,  if  ever,  falls  the  fiat  of 
the  Mind  that  bade  us  be.  And  thus  the  only  way  in  which  we 
can  approach  it  is  to  put  ourselves  in  dependence  upon  that  Spirit. 
And  the  only  course  we  can  follow  is  this  :  not  by  endeavouring 
to  anticipate  in  thought  the  moment  of  our  end — that,  perhaps, 
only  adds  to  its  terrors  when  it  comes — but  by  resolutely  and 
tenderly,  day  after  day,  learning  to  commend  ourselves  to  the 
P.W.  T 


hand  of  God  ;  to  make  what  efforts  we  can  ;  to  do  our  best  ;  to 
decide  as  simply  and  sincerely  as  possible  what  our  path  should 
be,  and  then  to  leave  the  issue  humbly  and  quietly  with  God. 

I  do  this,  a  little  ;  it  brings  with  it  a  wonderful  tranquillity 
and  peace.  And  the  strange  thing  is  that  one  does  not  do  it 
oftener,  when  one  has  so  often  experienced  its  healing  and 
strengthening  power. 

(A,  C.  BENSON— The  Upton  Letters.) 

EXERCISE  No.  20. 

But  I  must  confess  that  I  like  all  memoirs.  I  like  them  for 
their  form,  just  as  much  as  for  their  matter.  In  literature  mere 
egotism  is  delightful.  It  is  what  fascinates  us  in  the  letters  of 
personalities  so  different  as  Cicero  and  Balzac,  Flaubert  and 
Berlioz,  Byron  and  Madame  de  Sevigne.  Whenever  we  come 
across  it,  and,  strangely  enough,  it  is  rather  rare,  we  cannot  but 
welcome  it,  and  do  not  easily  forget  it.  Humanity  will  always 
love  Rousseau  for  having  confessed  his  sins,  not  to  a  priest,  but 
to  the  world  ;  and  the  couchant  nymphs  that  Cellini  wrought  in 
bronze  for  the  castle  of  King  Francis,  the  green  and  gold 
Perseus,  even,  that  in  the  open  Loggia  at  Florence  shows  the 
moon  the  dead  terror  that  once  turned  life  to  stone,  have  not 
given  it  more  pleasure  than  has  that  autobiography  in  which 
the  supreme  scoundrel  of  the  Renaissance  relates  the  story  of 
his  splendour  and  his  shame.  The  opinions,  the  character,  the 
achievements  of  the  man,  matter  very  little.  He  may  be  a 
sceptic  like  the  gentle  Sieur  de  Montaigne,  or  a  saint  like  the 
bitter  son  of  Monica,  but  when  he  tells  us  his  own  secrets  he 
can  always  charm  our  ears  to  listening  and  our  lips  to  silence. 
The  mode  of  thought  that  Cardinal  Newman  represented — if 
that  can  be  called  a  mode  of  thought  which  seeks  to  solve 
intellectual  problems  by  a  denial  of  the  supremacy  of  the 
intellect — may  not,  cannot,  I  think,  survive.  But  the  world 
will  never  weary  of  watching  that  troubled  soul  in  its  progress 
from  darkness  to  darkness.  The  lonely  church  at  Littlemore, 
where  "  the  breath  of  the  morning  is  damp,  and  worshippers 
are  few,"  will  always  be  dear  to  it,  and  whenever  men  see  the 
yellow  snapdragon  blossoming  on  the  wall  of  Trinity  they  will 
think  of  that  gracious  undergraduate  who  saw  in  the  flower's 
recurrence  a  prophecy  that  he  would  abide  for  ever  with  the 
Benign  Mother  of  his  days — a  prophecy  that  Faith,  in  her 


wisdom  or  her  folly,  suffered  not  to  be  fulfilled.  Yes  ;  auto- 
biography is  irresistible.  Poor,  silly,  conceited  Mr.  Secretary 
Pepys  has  chattered  his  way  into  the  circle  of  the  Immortals, 
and,  conscious  that  indiscretion  is  the  better  part  of  valour, 
bustles  about  among  them  in  that  "  shaggy  purple  gown  with 
gold  buttons  and  looped  lace  "  which  he  is  so  fond  of  describing 
to  us,  perfectly  at  his  ease,  and  prattling,  to  his  own  and  our 
infinite  pleasure,  of  the  Indian  blue  petticoat  that  he  bought  for 
his  wife,  of  the  "good  hog's  harslet,"  and  the  "pleasant French 
fricassee  of  veal "  that  he  loved  to  eat,  of  his  game  of  bowls  with 
Will  Joyce,  and  his  "  gadding  after  beauties,"  and  his  reciting 
of  Hamlet  on  a  Sunday,  and  his  playing  of  the  viol  on  week 
days,  and  other  wicked  or  trivial  things.  Even  in  actual  life 
egotism  is  not  without  its  attractions.  When  people  talk  to  us 
about  others  they  are  usually  dull.  When  they  talk  to  us  about 
themselves  they  are  nearly  always  interesting,  and  if  one  could 
shut  them  up,  when  they  become  wearisome,  as  easily  as  one 
can  shut  up  a  book  of  which  one  has  grown  wearied,  they  would 
be  perfect  absolutely. 

(OSCAR  WILDE — Intentions.} 

EXERCISE  No.  21. 

When  a  child  falls,  or  runs  its  head  against  the  table,  it 
suffers  a  pain,  the  remembrance  of  which  tends  to  make  it  more 
careful ;  and  by  repetition  of  such  experiences,  it  is  eventually 
disciplined  into  proper  guidance  of  its  movements.  If  it  lays 
hold  of  the  fire-bars,  thrusts  its  hand  into  a  candle-flame,  or 
spills  boiling  water  on  any  part  of  its  skin,  the  resulting  burn 
or  scald  is  a  lesson  not  easily  forgotten.  So  deep  an  impression 
is  produced  by  one  or  two  events  of  this  kind,  that  no  persuasion 
will  afterwards  induce  it  thus  to  disregard  the  laws  of  its 

Now  in  these  cases,  Nature  illustrates  to  us  in  the  simplest 
way,  the  true  theory  and  practice  of  moral  discipline — a  theory 
and  practice  which,  however  much  they  may  seem  to  the  super- 
ficial like  those  commonly  received,  we  shall  find  on  examination 
to  differ  from  them  very  widely. 

Observe,  first,  that  in  bodily  injuries  and  their  penalties  we 
have  misconduct  and  its  consequences  reduced  to  their  simplest 
forms.  Though,  according  to  their  popular  acceptations,  right  and 
wrong  are  words  scarcely  applicable  to  actions  that  have  none  but 


directly  bodily  effects ;  yet  whoever  considers  the  matter  will  see 
that  such  actions  must  be  as  much  classifiable  under  these  heads 
as  any  other  actions.  From  whatever  assumption  they  start,  all 
theories  of  morality  agree  that  conduct  whose  total  results, 
immediate  and  remote,  are  beneficial,  is  good  conduct ;  while  con- 
duct whose  total  results,  immediate  and  remote,  are  injurious,  is 
bad  conduct.  The  ultimate  standards  by  which  all  men  judge  of 
behaviour,  are  the  resulting  happiness  or  misery.  We  consider 
drunkenness  wrong  because  of  the  physical  degeneracy  and 
accompanying  moral  evils  entailed  on  the  drunkard  and  his 
dependents.  Did  theft  give  pleasure  both  to  taker  and  loser, 
we  should  not  find  it  in  our  catalogue  of  sins.  Were  it  con- 
ceivable that  kind  actions  multiplied  human  sufferings,  we 
should  condemn  them — should  not  consider  them  kind.  It 
needs  but  to  read  the  first  newspaper-leader,  or  listen  to  any 
conversation  on  social  affairs,  to  see  that  acts  of  parliament, 
political  movements,  philanthropic  agitations,  in  common  with 
the  doings  of  individuals,  are  judged  by  their  anticipated  results 
in  augmenting  the  pleasures  or  pains  of  men.  And  if  on 
analysing  all  secondary  superinduced  ideas,  we  find  these  to  be 
our  final  tests  of  right  and  wrong,  we  cannot  refuse  to  class 
bodily  conduct  as  right  or  wrong  according  to  the  beneficial  or 
detrimental  results  produced. 

Note,  in  the  second  place,  the  character  of  the  punishments 
by  which  these  physical  transgressions  are  prevented.  Punish- 
ments, we  call  them,  in  the  absence  of  a  better  word  ;  for  they 
are  not  punishments  in  the  literal  sense.  They  are  not  artificial 
and  unnecessary  inflictions  of  pain ;  but  are  simply  the  beneficent 
checks  to  actions  that  are  essentially  at  variance  with  bodily 
welfare — checks  in  the  absence  of  which  life  would  be  quickly 
destroyed  by  bodily  injuries.  It  is  the  peculiarity  of  these 
penalties,  if  we  must  so  call  them,  that  they  are  simply  the 
unavoidable  consequences  of  the  deeds  which  they  follow :  they 
are  nothing  more  than  the  inevitable  reactions  entailed  by  the 
child's  actions. 

Let  it  be  further  borne  in  mind  that  these  painful  reactions 
are  proportionate  to  the  transgressions.  A  slight  accident 
brings  a  slight  pain  ;  a  more  serious  one,  a  severer  pain.  It  is 
not  ordained  that  an  urchin  who  tumbles  off  the  doorstep,  shall 
suffer  in  excess  of  the  amount  necessary ;  with  the  view  of 
making  it  still  more  cautious  than  the  necessary  suffering  will 
make  it.  But  from  its  daily  experience  it  is  left  to  learn  the 
greater  or  less  penalties  of  greater  or  less  errors ;  and  to  behave 

And  then  mark,  lastly,  that  these  natural  reactions  which 
follow  the  child's  wrong  actions,  are  constant,  direct,  unhesi- 


tating,  and  not  to  be  escaped.  No  threats  ;  but  a  silent, 
rigorous  performance.  If  a  child  runs  a  pin  into  its  finger,  pain 
follows.  If  it  does  it  again,  there  is  again  the  same  result :  and 
so  on  perpetually.  In  all  its  dealings  with  inorganic  Nature  it 
finds  this  unswerving  persistence,  which  listens  to  no  excuse, 
and  from  which  there  is  no  appeal  ;  and  very  soon  recognising 
this  stern  though  beneficent  discipline,  it  becomes  extremely 
careful  not  to  transgress. 

(HERBERT  SPENCER — Education.) 

EXERCISE  No.  22. 

On  their  long  route  marches,  on  the  marches  of  their 
nianreuvres  and  their  wars,  the  French,  along  their  roads  which 
are  direct  and  august  (and  at  evening,  when  one  is  weary, 
sombre),  seek  a  place  of  reunion  and  repose :  upon  this  the 
corps  converges,  and  then  at  last  a  man  may  lie  a  long  night 
under  shelter  and  content  to  sleep:  a  town  lies  before  the 
pioneers  and  is  their  goal.  It  stands,  tiny  with  spires,  above 
the  horizon  of  their  hedgeless  plains,  and  as  they  go  they  sing 
of  the  halt,  or,  for  long  spaces,  are  silent,  bent  trudging  under 
the  pack ;  for  they  abhor  parade.  Very  often  they  do  not 
reach  their  goal.  They  then  lie  out  in  bivouac  under  the  sky 
and  light  very  many  fires,  five  to  a  company  or  more,  and  sleep 
out  unsatisfied.  Such  a  strain  and  such  an  attempt:  such  a 
march,  such  a  disappointment,  and  such  a  goal  are  the  symbols 
of  their  history ;  for  they  are  perpetually  seeking,  under  arms, 
a  Europe  that  shall  endure.  In  this  search  they  must  continue 
here  in  Africa,  as  they  continue  in  their  own  country,  that 
march  of  theirs  which  sees  the  city  ever  before  it  and  yet  cannot 
come  near  to  salute  the  guard  at  the  gates  and  to  enter  in.  It 
is  their  business  to  re-create  the  Empire  in  this  province  of 
Africa.  It  may  be  that  here  also  they  will  come  to  no  comple- 
tion ;  but  if  they  fail,  Europe  will  fail  with  them,  and  it  will 
be  a  sign  that  our  tradition  has  ended. 

They  have  done  the  Latin  thing.  First  they  have  designed, 
then  organised,  then  built,  then  ploughed,  and  their  wealth 
has  come  last.  The  mind  is  present  to  excess  in  the  stamp  they 
have  laid  upon  Africa.  Their  utter  regularity  and  the  sense  of 
will  envelop  the  whole  province ;  and  their  genius,  inflexible 
and  yet  alert,  alert  and  yet  monotonous,  is  to  be  seen  every- 


where  in  similar  roads,   similar  bridges  of  careful   and  even 
ornamented  stone,  similar  barracks  and  loopholed  walls. 

There  is  a  perspective  upon  the  High  Plateaux  which  though 
it  is  exceptional  is  typical  of  their  spirit.  It  is  on  the  salt  plain 
just  before  the  gate  of  the  desert  is  reached,  and  the  fall  on  to 
the  desert  begun.  Here  the  flat  and  unfruitful  level  glares 
white  and  red :  it  is  of  little  use  to  men  or  horse.  Some  few 
adventurers,  like  their  peers  in  the  Rockies,  have  attempted  to 
enclose  a  patch  or  two  of  ground,  but  the  whole  landscape  is 
parched  and  dead.  Through  this,  right  on  like  a  gesture  of 
command,  like  the  dart  of  a  spear,  goes  the  rail,  urging  towards 
the  Sahara,  as  though  the  Sahara  were  not  a  boundary  but  a 
goal.  The  odd,  single  hills,  as  high  as  the  Wrekin  or  higher, 
upon  which  not  even  the  goats  can  live,  look  down  upon  the 
straight  line  thus  traced  :  these  hills  and  the  track  beneath 
them  afford  a  stupendous  contrast.  Nowhere  is  the  determina- 
tion of  man  more  defiant  against  the  sullen  refusal  of  the 

There  is  another  effort  of  the  French  which  may  be  watched 
with  more  anxiety  and  more  comprehension  by  northern  men 
than  their  admirable  roads  or  their  railways  or  their  wires 
above  the  sand,  and  that  is  their  afforestation. 

It  is  a  debate  which  will  not  be  decided  (for  the  material  of 
full  decision  is  lacking)  whether,  since  the  Romans  crowded 
their  millions  into  this  Africa,  the  rainfall  has  or  has  not 
changed.  It  is  certain  that  they  husbanded  water  upon  every 
side  and  built  great  barricades  to  hold  the  streams;  yet  it  is 
certain,  also,  that  their  cities  stood  where  no  such  great  groups 
of  men  could  live  to-day.  There  are  those  who  believe  that 
under  Atlas,  towards  the  desert,  a  shallow  sea  spread  westward 
from  the  Mediterranean  and  from  Syrtis :  there  are  others  who 
believe  that  the  dry  water-courses  of  the  Sahara  were  recently 
alive  with  streams,  and  that  the  tombs  and  inscriptions  of  the 
waste  places,  now  half  buried  in  the  sand,  prove  a  great  lake 
upon  whose  shores  a  whole  province  could  cultivate  and  live. 
Both  hypotheses  are  doubtful  for  this  reason — that  no  good 
legend  preserves  the  record.  Changes  far  less  momentous  have 
left  whole  cycles  of  ballads  and  stories  behind  them.  The 
Sahara  has  been  the  Sahara  since  men  have  sung  or  spoken 
of  it. 

(HILAIRE  BELLOC — Esto  Perpetua.} 


EXERCISE  No.  23. 

There  is  a  marked  likeness  between  the  virtue  of  man  and  the 
enlightenment  of  the  globe  he  inhabits — the  same  diminishing 
gradation  in  vigour  up  to  the  limits  of  their  domains,  the  same 
essential  separation  from  their  contraries— the  same  twilight 
at  the  meeting  of  the  two :  a  something  wider  belt  than  the 
line  where  the  world  rolls  into  night,  that  strange  twilight  of 
the  virtues  ;  that  dusky  debateable  land,  wherein  zeal  becomes 
impatience,  and  temperance  becomes  severity,  and  justice 
becomes  cruelty,  and  faith  superstition,  and  each  and  all 
vanish  into  gloom. 

Nevertheless,  with  the  greater  number  of  them,  though  their 
dimness  increases  gradually,  we  may  mark  the  moment  of  their 
sunset  ;  and,  happily,  may  turn  the  shadow  back  by  the  way  by 
which  it  had  gone  down  ;  but  for  one,  the  line  of  the  horizon  is 
irregular  and  undefined  ;  and  this,  too,  the  very  equator  and 
girdle  of  them  all— Truth  ;  that  only  one  of  which  there  are  no 
degrees,  but  breaks  and  rents  continually  ;  that  pillar  of  the 
earth,  yet  a  cloudy  pillar  ;  that  golden  and  narrow  line,  which 
the  very  powers  and  virtues  that  lean  upon  it  bend,  which 
policy  and  prudence  conceal,  which  kindness  and  courtesy  modify, 
which  courage  overshadows  with  his  shield,  imagination  covers 
with  her  wings,  and  charity  dims  with  her  tears.  How  difficult 
must  the  maintenance  of  that  authority  be,  which,  while  it  has 
to  restrain  the  hostility  of  all  the  worst  principles  of  man,  has 
also  to  restrain  the  disorders  of  his  best — which  is  continually 
assaulted  by  the  one  and  betrayed  by  the  other,  and  which 
regards  with  the  same  severity  the  lightest  and  the  boldest 
violations  of  its  law  !  There  are  some  faults  slight  in  the  sight 
of  love,  some  errors  slight  in  the  estimate  of  wisdom  ;  but  truth 
forgives  no  insult,  and  endures  no  stain. 

We  do  not  enough  consider  this  ;  nor  enough  dread  the  slight 
and  continual  occasions  of  offence  against  her.  We  are  too  much 
in  the  habit  of  looking  at  falsehood  in  its  darkest  associations, 
and  through  the  colour  of  its  worst  purposes.  That  indignation 
which  we  profess  to  feel  at  deceit  absolute,  is  indeed  only  at 
deceit  malicious.  We  resent  calumny,  hypocrisy,  and  treachery, 
because  they  harm  us,  not  because  they  are  untrue.  Take  the 
detraction  and  the  mischief  from  the  untruth,  and  we  are  little 
offended  by  it  ;  turn  it  into  praise,  and  we  may  be  pleased  with 
it.  And  yet  it  is  not  calumny  nor  treachery  that  does  the 
largest  sum  of  mischief  in  the  world  ;  they  are  continually 


crushed,  and  are  felt  only  in  being  conquered.  But  it  is  the 
glistening  and  softly  spoken  lie  ;  the  amiable  fallacy  ;  the 
patriotic  lie  of  the  historian,  the  provident  lie  of  the  politician, 
the  zealous  lie  of  the  partisan,  the  merciful  lie  of  the  friend,  and 
the  careless  lie  of  each  man  to  himself,  that  cast  that  black 
mystery  over  humanity,  through  which  we  thank  any  man  who 
pierces,  as  we  would  thank  one  who  dug  a  well  in  a  desert ; 
happy,  that  the  thirst  for  truth  still  remains  with  us,  even  when 
we  have  wilfully  left  the  fountains  of  it. 

It  would  be  well  if  moralists  less  frequently  confused  the 
greatness  of  a  sin  with  its  unpardonableness.  The  two  characters 
are  altogether  distinct.  The  greatness  of  a  fault  depends  partly 
on  the  nature  of  the  person  against  whom  it  is  committed,  partly 
upon  the  extent  of  its  consequences.  Its  pardonableness  depends, 
humanly  speaking,  on  the  degree  of  temptation  to  it.  One  class 
of  circumstances  determines  the  weight  of  the  attaching  punish- 
ment ;  the  other,  the  claim  to  remission  of  -punishment ;  and 
since  it  is  not  always  easy  for  men  to  estimate  the  relative 
weight,  nor  always  possible  for  them  to  know  the  relative  con- 
sequences, of  crime,  it  is  usually  wise  in  them  to  quit  the  care  of 
such  nice  measurements  and  to  look  to  the  other  and  clearer 
condition  of  culpability,  esteeming  those  faults  worst  which  are 
committed  under  least  temptation. 

(JOHN  RUSKIN — The  Seven  Lamps  of  Architecture.) 

EXERCISE  No.  24. 

No  landscape  is  so  masterful  as  the  veld.  Broken  up  into 
valleys,  reclaimed  in  parts  by  man,  showing  fifty  varieties  of 
scene,  it  yet  preserves  one  essential  character.  For,  homely  as 
it  is,  it  is  likewise  untameable.  There  are  no  fierce  encroach- 
ments about  it.  A  deserted  garden  does  not  return  to  the  veld 
for  many  years,  if  ever.  It  is  not,  like  the  jungle,  the  natural 
enemy  of  man,  waiting  for  a  chance  to  enter  and  obliterate  his 
handiwork,  and  repelled  only  by  sleepless  watching.  Rather  it 
is  the  quiet  spectator  of  human  efforts,  ready  to  meet  them  half- 
way, and  yet  from  its  vastness  always  the  dominant  feature  in 
any  landscape.  Its  normal  air  is  sad,  grey,  and  Quakerish, 
never  flamboyant  under  the  brightest  sun,  and  yet  both 
strenuous  and  restful.  The  few  red  monstrosities  man  has 
built  on  its  edge  serve  only  to  set  off  this  essential  dignity. 
For  one  thing,  it  is  not  created  according  to  the  scale  of  man. 


It  will  give  him  a  home,  but  he  will  never  alter  its  aspect.  Let 
him  plough  and  reap  it  for  a  thousand  years,  and  he  may 
beautify  and  fructify  but  never  change  it.  The  face  of  England 
has  altered  materially  in  two  centuries,  because  England  is  on 
a  human  scale, — a  pasture  land,  without  intrinsic  wildness. 
But  cultivation  on  the  veld  will  always  be  superimposed  :  it 
will  remain  like  Egypt,  ageless  and  immutable — one  of  the 
primeval  types  of  the  created  world. 

But,  though  dominant,  it  is  also  adaptable.  It  can,  for  the 
moment,  assume  against  its  unchangeable  background  a 
chameleon-like  variety.  Sky  and  weather  combine  to  make 
it  imitative  at  times.  Now,  under  a  pale  Italian  sky,  it  is  the 
Campagna— hot,  airless,  profoundly  melancholy.  Again,  when 
the  mist  drives  over  it,  and  wet  scarps  of  hill  stand  out  among 
clouds,  it  is  Dartmoor  or  Liddesdale  ;  or  on  a  radiant  evening, 
when  the  mountains  are  one  bank  of  hazy  purple,  it  has 
borrowed  from  Skye  and  the  far  West  Highlands.  On  a  clear 
steely  morning  it  has  the  air  of  its  namesake,  the  Norwegian 
f  jelds, — in  one  way  the  closest  of  its  parallels.  But  each  phase 
passes,  the  tantalising  memory  goes,  and  we  are  back  again 
upon  the  aboriginal  veld,  so  individual  that  we  wonder  whence 
arose  the  illusion. 

A  modern  is  badly  trained  for  appreciating  certain  kinds  of 
scenery.  Generations  of  poets  and  essayists  have  so  stamped 
the  "  pathetic  fallacy "  upon  his  soul  that  wherever  he  goes, 
unless  in  the  presence  of  a  Niagara  or  a  Mount  Everest,  he  runs 
wild,  looking  for  a  human  interest  or  an  historical  memory. 
This  is  well  enough  in  the  old  settled  lands,  but  on  the  veld  it  is 
curiously  inept.  The  man  who,  in  Emerson's  phrase,  seeks  "  to 
impress  his  English  whim  upon  the  immutable  past,"  will  find 
little  reward  for  his  gymnastics.  Not  that  there  is  no  history 
of  a  kind — of  Bantu  wars,  and  great  tribal  immigrations,  of 
wandering  gold-seekers  and  Portuguese  adventurers,  of  the 
voortrekker  and  the  heroic  battles  in  the  wilds.  But  the  veld 
is  so  little  subject  to  human  life  that  had  Thermopylae  been 
fought  in  yonder  nek,  or  had  Saint  Francis  wandered  on  this 
hillside,  it  would  have  mastered  and  obliterated  the  memories. 
It  has  its  history  ;  but  it  is  the  history  of  cosmic  forces,  of  the 
cycle  of  seasons,  of  storms  and  suns  and  floods,  the  joys  and 
sorrows  of  the  natural  world.  Men  dreamed  of  it  and  its  wealth 
long  ago  in  Portugal  and  Holland.  They  have  quarrelled 
about  it  in  London  and  Cape  Town,  fought  for  it,  parcelled  it 
out  in  maps,  bought  it  and  sold  it.  It  has  been  subject  for  long 
to  the  lusts  and  hopes  of  man.  It  has  been  lauded  with 
epithets  ;  town -bred  folk  have  made  theories  about  it  ;  armies 
have  rumbled  across  it ;  the  flood  of  high  politics  has  swept  it. 


But  the  veld  has  no  memory  of  it.  Men  go  and  come,  kingdoms 
fall  and  rise,  but  it  remains  austere,  secluded,  impenetrable, 
"  the  still  unravished  bride  of  quietness." 

(JOHN  BUCHAN — The  African  Colony.) 

EXERCISE  No.  25. 

A  fact  is  not  called  a  fact,  but  a  piece  of  gossip,  if  it  does  not 
fall  into  one  of  your  scholastic  categories.  An  enquiry  must  be 
in  some  acknowledged  direction,  with  a  name  to  go  by  ;  or  else 
you  are  not  enquiring  at  all,  only  lounging  ;  and  the  workhouse 
is  too  good  for  you.  It  is  supposed  that  all  knowledge  is  at  the 
bottom  of  a  well,  or  the  far  end  of  a  telescope.  Sainte-Beuve, 
as  he  grew  older,  came  to  regard  all  experience  as  a  single  great 
book,  in  which  to  study  for  a  few  years  ere  we  go  hence  ;  and  it 
seemed  all  one  to  him  whether  you  should  read  in  Chapter  xx., 
which  is  the  differential  calculus,  or  in  Chapter  xxxix.,  which 
is  hearing  the  band  play  in  the  gardens.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
an  intelligent  person,  looking  out  of  his  eyes  and  hearkening  in 
his  ears,  with  a  smile  on  his  face  all  the  time,  will  get  more  true 
education  than  many  another  in  a  life  of  heroic  vigils.  There 
is  certainly  some  chill  and  arid  knowledge  to  be  found  upon 
the  summits  of  formal  and  laborious  science  ;  but  it  is  all  round 
about  you,  and  for  the  trouble  of  looking,  that  you  will  acquire 
the  warm  and  palpitating  facts  of  life.  While  others  are  filling 
their  memory  with  a  lumber  of  words,  one-half  of  which  they 
will  forget  before  the  week  be  out,  your  truant  may  learn  some 
really  useful  art ;  to  play  the  fiddle,  to  know  a  good  cigar,  or  to 
speak  with  ease  and  opportunity  to  all  varieties  of  men.  Many 
who  have  "plied  their  book  diligently,"  and  know  all  about 
some  one  branch  or  another  of  accepted  lore,  come  out  of  the 
study  with  an  ancient  and  owl-like  demeanour,  and  prove  dry, 
stockish,  and  dyspeptic  in  all  the  better  and  brighter  parts  of 
life.  Many  make  a  large  fortune,  who  remain  underbred  and 
pathetically  stupid  to  the  last.  And  meantime  there  goes  the 
idler,  who  began  life  along  with  them — by  your  leave,  a  different 
picture.  He  has  had  time  to  take  care  of  his  health  and  his 
spirits  ;  he  has  been  a  great  deal  in  the  open  air,  which  is  the 
most  salutary  of  all  things  for  both  body  and  mind  ;  and  if  he 
has  never  read  the  great  Book  in  very  recondite  places,  he  has 
dipped  into  it  and  skimmed  it  over  to  excellent  purpose.  Might 
not  the  student  afford  some  Hebrew  roots,  and  the  business  man 


some  of  his  half-crowns,  for  a  share  of  the  idler's  knowledge  of 
life  at  large,  and  Art  of  Living  ?  Nay,  and  the  idler  has  another 
and  more  important  quality  than  these.  I  mean  his  wisdom. 
He  who  has  much  looked  on  at  the  childish  satisfaction  of  other 
people  in  their  hobbies,  will  regard  his  own  with  only  a  very 
ironical  indulgence.  He  will  not  be  heard  among  the  dogma- 
tists. He  will  have  a  great  and  cool  allowance  for  all  sorts  of 
people  and  opinions.  If  he  finds  no  out-of-the-way  truths,  he 
will  identify  himself  with  no  very  burning  falsehood.  His  way 
takes  him  along  a  by-road,  not  much  frequented,  but  very  even 
and  pleasant  which  is  called  Commonplace  Lane,  and  leads  to 
the  Belvedere  of  Commonsense.  Thence  he  .shall  command  an 
agreeable,  if  no  very  noble  prospect ;  and  while  others  behold 
the  East  and  West,  the  Devil  and  the  Sunrise,  he  will  be  con- 
tentedly aware  of  a  sort  of  morning  hour  upon  all  sublunary 
things,  with  an  army  of  shadows  running  speedily  and  in  many 
different  directions  into  the  great  daylight  of  Eternity.  The 
shadows  and  the  generations,  the  shrill  doctors  and  the  plangent 
wars,  go  by  into  ultimate  silence  and  emptiness ;  but  underneath 
all  this,  a  man  may  see,  out  of  the  Belvedere  windows,  much 
green  and  peaceful  landscape ;  many  firelit  parlours ;  good 
people  laughing,  drinking,  and  making  love,  as  they  did  before 
the  flood  or  the  French  Revolution  ;  and  the  old  shepherd 
telling  his  tale  under  the  hawthorn. 

(ROBERT  Louis  STEVENSON —  Virginibus  Puerisque.) 

EXEECISE  No.  26. 

It  had  become  a  habit  with  Marius — one  of  his  modernisms — 
developed  by  his  assistance  at  those  "  conversations  "  of  Aurelius 
with  himself,  to  keep  a  register  of  the  movements  of  his  own 
private  thoughts  or  humours;  not  continuously  indeed,  but 
sometimes  for  lengthy  intervals,  during  which  it  was  no  idle 
self-indulgence,  but  a  necessity  of  his  intellectual  life,  to 
"  confess  himself,"  with  an  intimacy,  seemingly  rare  among  the 
ancients ;  ancient  writers,  at  all  events,  having  been  jealous,  for 
the  most  part,  of  affording  us  so  much  as  a  glimpse  of  that 
interior  self,  which  in  many  cases  would  have  actually  doubled 
the  interest  of  their  objective  informations. 

" If  a  particular  tutelary  or  genius"  writes  Marius,  " accord- 
ing to  old  belief,  walks  beside  each  one  of  us  through  life,  mine 
is  certainly  a  capricious  creature  !  He  fills  one  with  wayward, 


unaccountable,  yet  quite  irresistible  humours,  and  seems  always 
to  be  in  collusion  with  some  outward  circumstance,  often  trivial 
enough  in  itself — the  condition  of  the  weather,  forsooth  ! — the 
people  one  meets  by  chance — the  things  one  happens  to  overhear 
them  say  (veritable  ev6dioi.  a-u^oXoi,  or  omens  by  the  wayside,  as 
the  old  Greeks  fancied),  to  push  on  the  unreasonable  pre- 
possessions of  the  moment  into  weighty  motives.  It  was 
doubtless  a  quite  explicable,  physical  fatigue  which  presented 
me  to  myself,  on  awaking  this  morning,  so  lack-lustre  and  trite. 
But  I  must  needs  take  my  petulance,  contrasting  it  with  my 
accustomed  morning  hopefulness,  as  a  sign  of  the  ageing  of 
appetite,  of  a  decay  in  the  very  capacity  of  enjoyment.  We 
need  some  imaginative  stimulus,  some  not  impossible  ideal  which 
may  shape  vague  hope,  and  transform  it  into  effective  desire,  to 
carry  us  year  after  year,  without  disgust,  through  the  routine  - 
work  which  is  so  large  a  part  of  life. 

"  Then,  how  if  appetite,  be  it  for  real  or  ideal,  should  itself 
fail  one  after  awhile  ?  Ah,  yes !  it  is  of  cold  always  that  men 
die ;  and  on  some  of  us  it  creeps  very  gradually.  In  truth,  I 
can  remember  just  such  a  lack-lustre  condition  of  feeling  once 
or  twice  before.  But  I  note,  that  it  was  accompanied  then  by 
an  odd  indifference,  as  the  thought  of  them  occurred  to  me,  in 
regard  to  the  sufferings  of  others— a  kind  of  callousness,  so 
unusual  with  me,  as  at  once  to  mark  the  humour  it  accompanied 
as  a  palpably  morbid  one,  which  would  not  last.  Were  those 
sufferings,  great  or  little,  I  asked  myself  then,  of  more  real 
consequence  to  them  than  mine  to  me,  as  I  remind  myself  that 
*  nothing  that  will  end  is  really  long ' — long  enough  to  be 
thought  of  importance  ?  But  to-day,  my  own  sense  of  fatigue, 
the  pity  I  conceive  for  myself,  disposed  me  strongly  to  a  tender- 
ness for  others.  For  a  moment  the  whole  world  figured  to  me 
as  a  hospital  of  sick  persons  ;  many  of  them  sick  in  mind  ;  and 
all  of  whom  it  would  be  a  brutality  not  to  humour. 

"  Why,  when  I  went  out  to  walk-off  my  wayward  fancies,  did 
I  confront  the  very  sort  of  incident  (my  unfortunate  genius  had 
surely  beckoned  it  from  afar  to  vex  me)  likely  to  irritate  it 
further?  A  party  of  men  were  coming  down  the  street.  They 
were  leading  a  fine  race-horse ;  a  handsome  beast,  but  badly 
hurt  somewhere,  in  the  circus,  and  useless.  They  were  taking 
him  to  slaughter  ;  and  I  think  the  animal  knew  it :  he  cast 
such  looks,  as  if  of  mad  appeal,  to  those  who  passed  him,  as  he 
went  to  die  in  his  beauty  and  pride,  for  just  that  one  mischance 
or  fault,  among  the  strangers  to  whom  his  old  owner  had 
deserted  him ;  although  the  morning  air  was  still  so  animating, 
and  pleasant  to  snuff.  I  could  have  fancied  a  soul  in  the 
creature,  swelling  against  its  luck.  And  I  had  come  across  this 


incident  just  when  it  would  figure  to  me  as  the  very  symbol  of 
our  poor  humanity,  in  its  capacities  for  pain,  its  wretched 
accidents,  its  imperfect  sympathies,  which  can  never  quite 
identify  us  with  each  other ;  the  very  power  of  utterance  and 
appeal  seeming  to  fail,  in  proportion  as  our  sorrows  come  home 
to  ourselves,  are  really  our  own.  We  are  constructed  for  suffer- 
ing !  What  proofs  of  it  does  but  one  day  afford,  if  we  care  to 
note  them,  as  we  go — a  whole  long  chaplet  of  sorrowful 
mysteries !  Sunt  lacrimae  rerum  et  mentem  mortalia  tangunt." 
(WALTER  PATER — Marius  the  Epicurean.) 

EXERCISE  No  27. 

The  French  controversialist  is  a  polished  swordsman,  to  be 
dreaded  in  his  graces  and  courtesies.  The  German  is  Orson,  or 
the  mob,  or  a  marching  army,  in  defence  of  a  good  case  or  a  bad 
— a  big  or  a  little.  His  irony  is  a  missile  of  terrific  tonnage  ; 
sarcasm  he  emits  like  a  blast  from  a  dragon's  mouth.  He  must 
and  will  be  Titan.  He  stamps  his  foe  underfoot,  and  is  aston- 
ished that  the  creature  is  not  dead,  but  stinging  ;  for,  in  truth, 
the  Titan  is  contending,  by  comparison,  with  a  god. 

When  the  Germans  lie  on  their  arms,  looking  across  the 
Alsatian  frontier  at  the  crowds  of  Frenchmen  rushing  to  applaud 
L'ami  Fritz  at  the  Theatre  Francais,  looking  and  considering 
the  meaning  of  that  applause,  which  is  grimly  comic  in  its  poli- 
tical response  to  the  domestic  moral  of  the  play — when  the 
Germans  watch  and  are  silent,  their  force  of  character  tells. 
They  are  kings  in  music,  we  may  say  princes  in  poetry,  good 
speculators  in  philosophy,  and  our  leaders  in  scholarship.  That 
so  gifted  a  race,  possessed  moreover  of  the  stern  good  sense 
which  collects  the  waters  of  laughter  to  make  the  wells,  should 
show  at  a  disadvantage,  I  hold  for  a  proof,  instructive  to  us, 
that  the  discipline  of  the  comic  spirit  is  needful  to  their  growth. 
We  see  what  they  can  reach  to  in  that  great  figure  of  modern 
manhood,  Goethe.  They  are  a  growing  people  ;  they  are  con- 
versable as  well ;  and  when  their  men,  as  in  France,  and  at 
intervals  at  Berlin  tea-tables,  consent  to  talk  on  equal  terms  with 
their  women,  and  to  listen  to  them,  their  growth  will  be  acceler- 
ated and  be  shapelier.  Comedy,  or  in  any  form  the  Comic  spirit, 
will  then  come  to  them  to  cut  some  figures  out  of  the  block, 
show  them  the  mirror,  enliven  and  irradiate  the  social  intelli- 


Modern  French  comedy  is  commendable  for  the  directness  of 
the  study  of  actual  life,  as  far  as  that,  which  is  but  the  early 
step  in  such  a  scholarship,  can  be  of  service  in  composing  and 
colouring  the  picture.  A  consequence  of  this  crude,  though 
well-meant,  realism  is  the  collision  of  the  writers  in  their  scenes 
and  incidents,  and  in  their  characters.  The  Muse  of  most  of 
them  is  an  Aventurtire.  She  is  clever,  and  a  certain  diversion  exists 
in  the  united  scheme  for  confounding  her.  The  object  of  this 
person  is  to  reinstate  herself  in  the  decorous  world  ;  and  either, 
having  accomplished  this  purpose  through  deceit,  she  has  a 
nostalgie  de  la  boue,  that  eventually  casts  her  back  into  it,  or  she 
is  exposed  in  her  course  of  deception  when  she  is  about  to  gain 
her  end.  A  very  good,  innocent  young  man  is  her  victim,  or  a 
very  astute,  goodish  young  man  obstructs  her  path.  This  latter 
is  enabled  to  be  the  champion  of  the  decorous  world  by  knowing 
the  indecorous  as  well.  He  has  assisted  in  the  progress  of 
Aventurieres  downward  ;  he  will  not  help  them  to  ascend.  The 
world  is  with  him  ;  and  certainly  it  is  not  much  of  an  ascension 
they  aspire  to  ;  but  what  sort  of  a  figure  is  he  ?  The  triumph 
of  a  candid  realism  is  to  show  him  no  hero.  You  are  to  admire 
him  (for  it  must  be  supposed  that  realism  pretends  to  waken 
sane  admiration)  as  a  credibly  living  young  man  ;  no  better, 
only  a  little  firmer  and  shrewder,  than  the  rest.  If,  however, 
you  think  at  all,  after  the  curtain  has  fallen,  you  are  likely  to 
think  that  the  Aventurieres  have  a  case  to  plead  against  him. 
True,  and  the  author  has  not  said  anything  to  the  contrary  ;  he 
has  but  painted  from  the  life  ;  he  leaves  his  audience  to  the 
reflections  of  unphilosophic  minds  upon  life,  from  the  specimen 
he  has  presented  in  the  bright  and  narrow  circle  of  a  spy-glass. 

I  do  not  know  that  the  fly  in  amber  is  of  any  particular  use, 
but  the  Comic  idea  enclosed  in  a  comedy  makes  it  more  generally 
perceptible  and  portable,  and  that  is  an  advantage.  There  is  a 
benefit  to  men  in  taking  the  lessons  of  Comedy  in  congregations, 
for  it  enlivens  the  wits  ;  and  to  writers  it  is  beneficial,  for  they 
must  have  a  clear  scheme,  and  even  if  they  have  no  idea  to 
present,  they  must  prove  that  they  have  made  the  public  sit  to 
them  before  the  sitting  to  see  the  picture.  And  writing  for  the 
stage  would  be  a  corrective  of  a  too-incrusted  scholarly  style  into 
which  some  great  ones  fall  at  times.  It  keeps  minor  writers  to 
a  definite  plan,  and  to  English.  Many  of  them  now  swelling  a 
plethoric  market,  in  the  composition  of  novels,  in  pun-manufac- 
tories and  in  journalism  ;  attached  to  the  machinery  forcing 
perishable  matter  on  a  public  that  swallows  voraciously  and 
groans  ;  might,  with  encouragement,  be  attending  to  the  study 
of  art  in  literature.  Our  critics  appear  to  be  fascinated  by  the 
quaintness  of  our  public,  as  the  world  is  when  our  beast-garden 


has  a  new  importation  of  magnitude,  and  the  creature's  appetite 
is  reverently  consulted.  They  stipulate  for  a  writer's  popularity 
before  they  will  do  much  more  than  take  the  position  of  umpires 
to  record  his  failure  or  success.  Now  the  pig  supplies  the  most 
popular  of  dishes,  but  it  is  not  accounted  the  most  honoured  of 
animals,  unless  it  be  by  the  cottager.  Our  public  might  surely 
be  led  to  try  other,  perhaps  finer,  meat.  It  has  good  taste  in 
song.  It  might  be  taught  as  justly,  on  the  whole,  and  the  sooner 
when  the  cottager's  view  of  the  feast  shall  cease  to  be  the  humble 
one  of  our  literary  critics,  to  extend  this  capacity  for  delicate 
choosing  in  the  direction  of  the  matter  arousing  laughter. 

(GEORGE  MEREDITH — An  Essay  on  Comedy.} 



Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 

DEC  li  1937 
wine  FEB  04 19881 

Sl-lOOm-9,'47  (A5702sl6)476 

YB  02084